Cheese

J. Dairy Sci.
100:9952–9965
https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-12979
© American Dairy Science Association®, 2017.
A 100-Year Review: Cheese production and quality1

M. E. Johnson2
Wisconsin Center for Dairy Research, University of Wisconsin, Madison 53706
ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION: THE CHANGING SCENE

OF CHEESE MAKING, EDUCATION, AND RESEARCH
In the beginning, cheese making in the United States
was all art, but embracing science and technology was The earliest records of cheese production in the Unit-
necessary to make progress in producing a higher qual- ed States, compiled by the United States Census (cited
ity cheese. Traditional cheese making could not keep up in Thom and Fisk, 1918), showed that more than 45
with the demand for cheese, and the development of the million kilograms of cheese was produced in the United
factory system was necessary. Cheese quality suffered States in 1849. Women made most of the cheese, and all
because of poor-quality milk, but 3 major innovations of it was made from raw milk. The individual cheeses
changed that: refrigeration, commercial starters, and were generally small, quality was not uniform, and
the use of pasteurized milk for cheese making. Although about 50% was produced in New York. The first cheese
by all accounts cold storage improved cheese quality, it factory in the United States was built in New York
was the improvement of milk quality, pasteurization of in 1851, and it produced Cheddar. The cheeses were
milk, and the use of reliable cultures for fermentation generally wrapped in cloth, greased or smeared with
that had the biggest effect. Together with use of puri- lard or paraffin to reduce moisture loss, and ripened on
fied commercial cultures, pasteurization enabled cheese wooden shelves at ambient temperature. The factory
production to be conducted on a fixed time schedule. system was the outgrowth of the increased demand
Fundamental research on the genetics of starter bac- from England, which required larger cheeses of more
teria greatly increased the reliability of fermentation, uniform quality than the cheeses produced on the farm.
which in turn made automation feasible. Demand for Higher prices would be secured if these conditions were
functionality, machinability, application in baking, and met.
more emphasis on nutritional aspects (low fat and low By 1914 there were 3,520 cheese factories in the
sodium) of cheese took us back to the fundamental United States, mostly in Wisconsin (1,720) followed by
principles of cheese making and resulted in renewed New York (995) and Michigan (196), but a considerable
vigor for scientific investigations into the chemical, amount of cheese was still produced on the farm (more
microbiological, and enzymatic changes that occur dur- than 4 million kilograms on farms compared with more
ing cheese making and ripening. As milk production than 141 million kilograms in factories in 1909). Cheese
increased, cheese factories needed to become more ef- production had shifted away from New York to Wis-
ficient. Membrane concentration and separation of milk consin in a very dramatic way; by 1914, more than 50%
offered a solution and greatly enhanced plant capacity. of the cheese produced in the United States was made
Full implementation of membrane processing and use of in Wisconsin. New York and Wisconsin had a similar
its full potential have yet to be achieved. Implementa- numbers of cows, and cheese production decreased in
tion of new technologies, the science of cheese making, New York because of the huge demand for fluid milk in
and the development of further advances will require large cities. In 1916, cheese exports were 20 million ki-
highly trained personnel at both the academic and in- lograms and cheese imports were 14 million kilograms.
dustrial levels. This will be a great challenge to address Immigrants were requesting the cheeses of their native
and overcome. country, and production of the desired cheeses was be-
Key words: cheese, cheese production, cheese history coming more common. Imported cheeses were mostly
Parmesan and Gorgonzola from Italy, Emmental from
Switzerland, Roquefort and Camembert from France,
and Edam from Holland. Consequently, much of the
Received April 4, 2017. research done in the United States on cheese was on the
Accepted July 29, 2017. development of manufacturing schedules and improving
1
This review is part of a special issue of the Journal of Dairy Science
commissioned to celebrate 100 years of publishing (1917–2017). quality of these specialty cheeses. In 1916, the average
2
Corresponding author: [email protected] price of cheese in the United States was $0.37/kg, but
9952
100-YEAR REVIEW: CHEESE PRODUCTION AND QUALITY 9953
imported cheeses sold for $0.55/kg. Because US cheese water, lactose, minerals, and whey proteins depending
makers were successful at duplicating the imports, some on the pore size of the membranes. Consequently, CN
of the cheeses were misbranded and sold as though they and fat are concentrated. The use of membrane-filtered
were imports. milk allows the cheese maker to obtain higher cheese
Pasteurization of milk for cheese making was a new yields. Membrane processing has also been applied to
technology but was rarely used in 1914. There were whey and is used to concentrate whey proteins. Major
no antibiotics and no standards for bacteria in milk or advances in membrane technology have demonstrated
cheese or even for cheese composition. Milk was cooled that it has still not reached its potential, but imple-
in cans with water from natural springs. In 1914, the mentation of these advances in the United States is
average dairy herd size was less than 10 cows; some large slow due to regulatory constraints. Mechanization and
herds had 30 milking cows. Compared with 2016, in automation reduced labor costs, and the cost of milk is
1914 there were at least 200-fold more cheese factories, now the largest expense in cheese making. The yield of
and in Wisconsin there were about 17 times as many cheese per volume or weight of milk is based on fat and
dairy farms (Wisconsin Milk Marketing Board, 2017). CN contents of milk, the recovery of each as cheese, the
In Wisconsin, the number of cheese factories reached moisture content of the cheese, and the contribution
a peak of 2,300 in the 1920s but decreased to 138 by of added salt. Concentrating milk components using
2014. Major reasons for the decline included (1) the membrane processes, using equipment and technologies
presence of larger factories and increased Cheddar and that maximize recovery of fat and CN, and implement-
mozzarella cheese production in California and other ing standardized, fixed, timed manufacturing schedules
western states and (2) the demand for more consistency have greatly improved cheese yield and cheese making
in the quality of cheese produced in larger factories. efficiency but have also introduced many challenges.
Total cheese production in the United States was Two of the challenges are procuring trained person-
5,370 million kilograms in 2015. In 2014, 368 million nel to operate the equipment properly and adapting a
kilograms of cheese was exported and 142 million kilo- manufacturing schedule to produce cheeses that meet
grams of cheese was imported, mostly from France and the changing demands of the customer. Research and
Italy. Mozzarella is currently the most-produced cheese the education of employees that results from its imple-
in the United States. Correspondingly, per capita con- mentation are still at the heart of proper cheese making.
sumption of cheese has increased from about 2.3 kg In 1890, the University of Wisconsin’s Agricultural
in 1980 to 15.8 kg in 2015. There is also a very active Experiment Station started its Wisconsin Dairy School,
and steadfast group of cheese makers devoted to the the first of its kind in the United States. Technical
manufacture of cheese from raw milk and fancy styles training for cheese makers was at least a semester-long
of cheese that were once the mainstay of cheese produc- endeavor and was not necessarily tied to a graduate de-
tion in the United States. gree (i.e., 4-yr college degree). Out of desperation and
Technological advancements in cheese making equip- a lack of what he noted as a suitable book on cheese
ment and curd handling allowed for mechanization and making, John Decker, an instructor at the school, pub-
automation, which were necessary for this quantum lished his own book on cheese making in 1893. He noted
increase in cheese production and resulted in uniform that his book was necessary because the advances in
product, reduced bacteriological contamination, and re- science (microbiology) and technology (refrigeration)
duced manufacturing costs. Implementation of advances changed our views on health and offered the potential
in engineering of cheese making equipment began in the to improve cheese quality.
1960s and has continued rapidly since. However, for
automation to meet its potential, the rate and extent of THE JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE: CHEESE
acidification by the starter bacteria must be predictable FROM THE BEGINNING
and reliable. The main scientific advancement in cheese
making in the last 40 yr was the development of such Almost all the research on cheese making published in
starter strains. Research to maintain the reliability of the United States before 1917 was in the form of techni-
starter cultures and to improve them is a continuous cal bulletins by agricultural research stations (located
effort and will require additional scientific advances. especially in New York, Vermont, Ohio, Connecticut,
Another technological advancement in cheese mak- Wisconsin, and Iowa) and the USDA (Appendix Table
ing, membrane processing of milk, also had its roots in A1). This trend would continue for several decades.
the 1960s, but it was not implemented routinely until Many of the technical bulletins were on the general
the last 20 yr. Membrane processing of milk refers to method of manufacture of a specific type of cheese,
the separation and concentration of milk with mem- mostly cheeses that were imported due to their high
branes. It allows for the removal of a portion of the demand. Studies on the microbiology and chemistry
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 100 No. 12, 2017
9954 JOHNSON
involved in the cheese making practice were included cidity and unclean flavors in cheese often occurred with
in these bulletins. more vigorous stirring and when the milk was warmer.
Consequently, in the first year of the Journal of They recommended cooling milk with no or very little
Dairy Science very few papers were on cheese mak- agitation. New ways to cool milk were eventually devel-
ing or the chemistry of the cheese making process; oped, which facilitated the production of more milk at
that would continue for almost 10 yr. Most papers on the farm, enabled pick up every other day, and led to
dairy manufacturing were on butter. The first paper changes in the regulations on milk handling. Rancidity
on cheese published in the journal was on eyes of Swiss in cheese is now very rare and, when it does occur, it
cheese (Clark, 1917), followed 2 yr later by a paper on is almost always attributable to excessive agitation of
the use of buttermilk (by-product of butter making) milk collected from animals with mastitis.
in making a skim milk cheese for sale to recent im- Can milk was common into the 1960s and was still
migrants (Rudnick, 1919), who needed an inexpensive used until the early 1970s. With the advent of electrifi-
source of protein and were willing to sacrifice quality cation on the farm, it became possible to use mechani-
for nutrition. Subsequent papers on cheese focused on cal cooling to cool milk faster and to a much colder
fancy cheeses such as brick, Limburger, blue-veined, temperature. It also resulted in expansion of dairy herds
Swiss, and cottage cheeses but not Cheddar, the most and facilitated the hauling of milk from the farm in spe-
common cheese produced. cialized refrigerated milk trucks operated or contracted
Most initial papers on cheese making in the journal by the cheese plant. These trucks could transport up to
in the 1920s focused on improving cheese quality. Pas- 23,000 kg of milk. Milk was now collected from several
teurized milk for cheese making was being promoted farms by a single truck driver, which freed the farmer
as a sort of panacea to cure the major defect of the from making their own deliveries and the backbreaking
day: gassy cheese caused by coliforms. Pasteurization, a lifting of 45-kg cans full of milk.
relatively new process, was met with resistance because Two major changes in regulations resulted in the
of the cost of implementation and the availability of switch from can milk to bulk milk. Because it was now
equipment. By the 1960s, there was a trend in cheese- possible to rapidly cool milk to below 7°C, by the 1940s
related research published in the journal to detail the regulations were put in place requiring that milk be
chemistry involved in cheese functionality and starter cooled within 2 h of milking to below 7°C and that
culture technology. This trend continues because of mixed milk (milk already in the bulk tank mixed with
the pressure on cheese makers to supply cheese that newly obtained milk) not exceed 10°C. The second
requires machinability and specific bake performance regulation helped set limits on the maximum bacteria
(melt, stretch, color). Milk processing before cheese numbers in raw milk for cheese making, which decreased
making, especially that involving membrane technology from 1 million cfu of bacteria/mL of milk to 300,000 cfu
and issues associated with it, has played a major role in of bacteria/mL of milk. With the development of better
the numbers of papers published in the journal in the cleaning, sanitation, and cooling practices from the cow
past 2 decades (Appendix Table A1). These research through delivery of the milk to the cheese factory, the
papers may eventually pave the way for necessary numbers reached today by many producers are below
changes in the Code of Federal Regulations regarding 20,000 cfu of bacteria/mL of raw milk. Currently, most
the acceptance of membrane-filtered milks for making milk for cheese making contains less than 20,000 cfu
cheese and other dairy products. of bacteria/mL of milk, and with numbers of bacteria
between 5,000 and 10,000 cfu/mL of milk being very
CHANGES IN MILK PROCUREMENT AND MILK common, it could eventually become the standard.
QUALITY FOR CHEESE MAKING Because of the high bacterial numbers in raw milk
used in cheese making 100 yr ago and the negative ef-
What was it like to produce cheese in 1917? Probably fect it could have on cheese quality, technologists looked
not unlike when the first cheese factories were built. for ways to deal with poor-quality milk. Cheese makers
Milk was delivered daily in metal cans. Milk was cooled had little control over milking practices and handling
by placing the cans in cold spring water—approxi- at the farm, and there were no real monetary incentives
mately 12°C was the norm. This was generally a poor for the producer to improve milk quality, nor was it
means for cooling milk rapidly and resulted in very easy for the cheese maker to test raw milk quality. This
high bacteria numbers in the raw milk. Bacteria counts situation would change in the 1960s with the direct
exceeding 1 million/mL of milk were common. Cooling microscopic counting of bacteria in milk. This method,
was sometimes supplemented by the addition of ice to initially promoted by Knaysi and Ford (1938), made
the water, which facilitated more rapid cooling. Hlynka it routine to rapidly determine the bacterial quality of
et al. (1943) demonstrated that a rapid increase in ran- milk from individual producers, and factories instituted
premium payments for low bacteria numbers in milk. regardless of variety, Kelly (1939) advocated the use
The previous method for the bacteriological quality of of pasteurized milk rather than the common practice
raw milk was an indirect measurement that relied on of using raw milk for cheese making. However, there
the concept that poor-quality milk would contain a suf- was great reluctance to use pasteurization because of a
ficient quantity of acid producers to reduce methylene perceived decrease in the development of cheese flavor
blue to a yellow color in a short period (a few hours for and the cost and availability of equipment. Pasteuriza-
good milk and less time for poor-quality milk). tion was generally done with the holder method—what
Due to illness associated with drinking raw milk we now call low temperature, long time pasteurization.
contaminated with pathogens, by 1917 many munici- Today only small-volume cheese makers use it, and all
palities required the pasteurization of milk—but not others use an HTST method (flash method, as it was
milk for cheese making. The belief was that the acidic called). The HTST pasteurization method facilitates
conditions in cheese would most likely kill or greatly high-volume milk throughput, which is essential in
diminish the growth of pathogens in cheese. There was rapidly processing huge amounts of milk. Milk high
also no real panic that eating cheese would cause ill- in bacterial numbers would contain strains capable of
ness. This mindset culminated in the 1940s with the fermenting lactose and could interfere with the desired
requirement of using pasteurization for cheeses that rate of acidification during cheese making. The cheese
were consumed young (less than 60 d) because of the maker would not have strict control over the rate and
perception that it would take that long under acidic extent of acidification during cheese making, which is
conditions to kill pathogens present in cheese made one of the key components of successful cheese making.
from raw milk. Pasteurization of milk for cheese mak- Pasteurization kills most bacteria capable of fermenting
ing, initiated to improve cheese quality, did not neces- lactose and thus necessitates the use of added starter
sarily produce a cheese free of pathogens. Regardless of culture for proper fermentation. Pasteurization resulted
the heat treatment given the milk for cheese making, in much tighter control of acidification during cheese
if the cheeses were contaminated with pathogens and making, and this in turn helped facilitate better pro-
the cheeses were of low acidity and high water activity, cess control over cheese quality. In 1917, numbers of
pathogens could grow or at least not die. Reports of bacteria remaining in milk after pasteurization were in
pathogens that could affect the safety of cheese have the thousands per milliliter of milk. Today, bacteria
been published (Pearson and Marth, 1990; el-Gazzar numbers in pasteurized milk are generally less than 100
and Marth, 1992; Bachmann and Spahr, 1995; Ramsa- bacteria/mL of milk. These lower numbers are attribut-
ran et al., 1998; Lundén et al., 2004; Stephan et al., able to the initial low numbers in raw milk, which is
2008). facilitated by more effective overall cleaning and sanita-
Pasteurization of milk for cheese making was com- tion practices and cooling of milk on the farm and in
mon in New Zealand by 1923 but was rarely practiced bulk-milk hauling trucks used today. By 1943, several
in the United States at that time. Sammis and Bruhn states adopted the pasteurization requirement for milk
(1912) summarized the advantages of using pasteur- for cheese making. Universal adoption of pasteurization
ized milk for cheese making. These advantages included of milk for cheese making has met resistance from many
improvement in cheese quality, more uniform quality, artisanal and farmstead cheese makers, whose custom-
and higher cheese yield, and the cheese making pro- ers demand cheeses made from raw milk. Regulatory
cess could be systematized to such an extent that agencies today are demanding a higher level of scrutiny
cheese production could be on a fixed time schedule. of the cleanliness and sanitation of milk production on
Price (1927), Phillips (1928), and Wilson et al. (1945) the farm and in the cheese making facility than in the
verified their conclusions. As a result, the industry past. The US government has adopted a zero toler-
increasingly used pasteurized milk for cheese mak- ance policy for the occurrence of pathogens in cheese.
ing, even though it took more than 50 yr since it was Pasteurization of milk is only one hurdle in the effort to
first introduced to become commonplace. Milk quality keep pathogens out of cheese. Cheese is not made in a
at the time was poor by today’s standard. Bacteria sterile environment, and proper cleaning and sanitation
numbers as measured in research laboratories were of the cheese making facility to prevent contamina-
generally greater than 500,000 cfu/mL of milk and as tion is required. The Food and Drug Administration is
high as several million. An example of the times and mandating efforts to enforce guidelines to prevent con-
milk quality, Kelly (1939) reported numbers of bacte- tamination (i.e., Food Safety and Modernization Act).
ria in raw milk for the manufacture of cheese ranging The growth and survival of pathogens in cheese as the
from 1.8 million to 5 billion cfu/mL of milk. To con- result of contamination during manufacture, ripening,
trol gas formation caused by coliforms in Limburger or packaging depends on water activity, competitive-
cheese, which was a common defect in raw milk cheese ness with other bacteria, and pH history of the cheese.
9956 JOHNSON
Mold-ripened cheeses (e.g., Camembert or Brie) and the milk supply remained a topic for producers (McE-
soft, surface-ripened cheeses (e.g., Limburger) do not wen et al., 1991). There was considerable debate on the
offer sufficient protection against the growth of patho- overuse of antibiotics for treatment of mastitis. The
gens because they do not meet the criteria required to arguments against the overuse of antibiotics included
keep pathogens from growing. These cheeses have high the potential that pathogens could become resistant to
water activity, and during ripening they lose acidity the antibiotic and the fact that if the antibiotic got into
and thus become conducive to the growth of contami- the milk it could inhibit lactose fermentation by the
nants. Illness due to the consumption of cheese is very starter bacteria or cause an allergenic response in sensi-
rare, but when it does occur it adds to the argument tive people who consumed the cheese. Although under
for adoption of preventative measures, such as those federal law it was illegal to sell milk that contained
described by the Food Safety and Modernization Act. antibiotics, it was not until the 1960s that routine test-
A benefit of using pasteurized milk was that es- ing of raw milk become mandatory.
sentially all of the acid development was from the Extraneous matter in milk was common, and it was
added starter culture. Thus, the rate and extent of correlated with cheese quality. Clarification of milk for
acidification could be controlled and resulted in a more cheese making was promoted by Combs et al. (1924)
consistent cheese quality. Cheese making could now to remove extraneous matter (sediment, including dirt
be conducted on a fixed time schedule, a major event and hair), and the result was an improvement in cheese
that makes large-scale cheese making feasible today. quality. With the advent of electric motors in the 1930s,
However, recognized in the 1920s, prolonged use of mechanical separation became common. The sediment
pasteurizers and failure to clean and sanitize the equip- test for raw milk, which measured the amount of ex-
ment properly led to the development of biofilms on the traneous matter in milk, was established as an index of
walls of the regenerative heaters. Biofilms are produced the quality of milking practices. A high sediment test
when bacteria attach to equipment surfaces, produce meant that the teats were not cleaned properly before
an exopolysaccharide, and grow into masses of bacteria. milking. The sediment test results were also used as an
Biofilms are of concern in cheese plants and other dairy indicator of bacteriological quality because a high sedi-
processing facilities because they are the major source ment test and a high number of bacteria in milk usually
of postpasteurization contamination of milk by bacte- went hand in hand. Direct microbiological tests on raw
ria (Wong, 1998; Somers et al., 2001). Bacteria that milk were not yet done at the cheese factories. Sedi-
can survive pasteurization include gas formers, spore ment testing was required by many state regulations
formers, and acid producers, particularly Streptococcus but has since been dropped by most states because
thermophilus, which, although greatly reduced in num- direct bacteriological testing is now done. Mechanical
ber by pasteurization, survive in sufficient numbers to clarification of milk was discontinued by many cheese
eventually develop a biofilm in the regenerative section factories in the late 1970s to early 1980s due to the cost
of the pasteurizer. The bacteria in the biofilm slough of operation and the loss of milk solids, which decreased
off and contaminate the milk. At times, Streptococcus cheese yields and added to the expense of waste treat-
thermophilus are so numerous in pasteurized milk that ment of the resultant sludge. Wedge wire and cloth
their acidification of milk overshadows the acid pro- filters replaced mechanical clarifiers. Clarification was
duced by the added starters; this prevents strict control reintroduced by some Cheddar cheese makers in the
over the rate and extent of acidification necessary for mid-2000s because an oily residue from a very effective
proper cheese making. Biofilms also develop on farm dry cow treatment (Huxley et al., 2002) sometimes got
equipment and are a source of bacterial contamination into milk. The oily residue could not be captured by
of raw milk, including pathogenic bacteria (Latorre et the wire or cloth filters and had to be mechanically
al., 2010; Lee et al., 2014). Recent research involves removed. The oily residue contained bismuth subni-
the coating of equipment with material that prevents trate, which produced a black spot discoloration when
attachment of the bacteria and thus prevents biofilm combined with sulfur compounds (Lay et al., 2007).
formation (Jindal et al., 2016). Generally, enzymes are The sulfur compounds are produced during extended
used as part of the cleaning regimen to remove biofilms ripening of Cheddar cheese as the result of microbio-
because the biofilms are not always removed by normal logical metabolism of sulfur containing AA.
chemical treatments. Somewhat analogous to mechanical clarification,
Antibiotics in milk became a major issue in the Swiss cheese manufacturers have implemented bacte-
late 1940s (Katznelson and Hood, 1949; Johns, 1953) rial removal systems. First used in Europe decades ago,
through the 1960s (Albright et al., 1961; Kosikowski, these systems were rarely used in the United States
1961), and how to prevent antibiotics from getting into until about the last 5 yr. These systems remove bacte-

rial spores, including spores of Clostridia and Bacillus To facilitate large increases in cheese production, the
that cause gassy, slitty cheese and produce off-flavors. development of a more stable and increased supply of
The systems include centrifugation or microfiltration. rennet was required. Before the 1980s, almost all ren-
net was extracted from calf stomachs or specific molds.
DEVELOPMENTS IN STARTERS AND RENNETS In the 1980s, development of fermentation-produced
chymosin met the challenge. Insertion of the calf genes
Major advances in cheese making technology have responsible for chymosin (i.e., the active enzyme in ren-
taken place over the last 45 yr. These include mecha- net) production into molds resulted in the molds pro-
nization, automation, and development of cultures and ducing chymosin in a fermentation process. More than
rennets. The advances in cheese making technology, 90% of the rennet used today is fermentation-produced
especially cheese making on a fixed time schedule, chymosin, and it has the advantage of being both ko-
would not be possible without reliable starter activity. sher and halal approved. This is especially important
Standardization of the rate and extent of acidifica- for the sale of products derived from whey.
tion by the starter bacteria is essential to producing
consistent cheese quality. Prior to the 1890s, cheese TECHNOLOGIES FOR IMPROVING CHEESE
starters were made at each cheese factory or farmstead MAKING EFFICIENCY
through the natural fermentation of good-quality milk.
In 1890, Chr. Hansen Inc. made pure cultures available Cheese yield and milk composition have been an
to cheese makers. Cheese makers could purchase vials important part of cheese making. They are the basis
of cheese starter and grow them up to the volumes they for milk payment, profitability, and cheese making ef-
needed. Unfortunately, not all went well. Cultures often ficiency. Cheese yield depends almost entirely on the
did not perform well, meaning that they often lost their moisture content of the cheese, fat and CN contents of
ability to produce sufficient acid. This was caused by a milk, and the retention of each during cheese making
bacteriophage infection. (Lopez-Fandiňo et al., 1996; Klei et al., 1998; Fenelon
A major breakthrough in developing consistent acid and Guinee, 1999; Jaeggi et al., 2003; Guinee et al.,
production by the starter was the discovery that lactose 2006; Lilbaek et al., 2006; Wedholm et al., 2006; Guinee
fermentation and proteolytic activity (needed for rapid et al., 2007; DeMarchi et al., 2008). Prior to the 1960s,
growth that was required for reliable lactose fermenta- cheese making was done in vats that required cutting
tion) were encoded by plasmid DNA (McKay et al., the clotted milk by hand using wire knives. Determina-
1976; Romero and Klaenhammer, 1993). This discovery tion of the proper firmness of the coagulum at cutting
was instrumental in the eventual development of starter was somewhat arbitrary but vital to the recovery of
strains resistant to bacteriophage also encoded by plas- as much fat as possible. Proper cutting and stirring
mid DNA (Sanders et al., 1986). Strains of starters that practices after cutting were also key to fat recovery as
resist infection by bacteriophage and that have consis- well as the retention of CN. Both fat and CN could be
tent acidification were an essential component of the lost due to the breakage of the curd particles during
technology of cheese manufacture on a predictable and cutting and stirring. Breakage of curd particles and
consistent basis and are vital to the automation used subsequent formation of small cheese particles, known
today (Cogan et al., 2007). Additionally, the medium as fines, result in fat and CN losses. Fat losses can be
used for the growth of starters received much atten- as high as 10 to 12%. In actual practice, CN losses
tion because the activity of the starter depended on (including fines) are generally around 5%, although
the conditions under which it was grown (Richardson standardized yield formulas use a value of 4% or less
et al., 1977; Whitehead et al., 1993). Although bulk (Emmons and Modler, 2010). In the 1960s, and again in
cultures (starter grown in media at the cheese factory) the 1990s with new designs, mechanical cutting in large
are still used today, especially for cheeses that will be vats would shape the way cheese is made. Initially, the
aged for extended periods, the technology of using cutting mechanism in the mechanized vats was verti-
starters has changed considerably. The cost of growing cal stirring, but later the cutting mechanism changed
bulk cultures and the potential loss of cheese yield due to horizontal stirring; both increased fat recovery over
to the replacement of milk by starter medium have led hand cutting. Mechanical cutting facilitated the use
to the use of highly concentrated starters sold in frozen of large volumes of milk, with some vats holding up
pellets. The pellets are added directly to the cheese to the equivalent of 45,360 kg of milk, and was vital
milk without having to grow the cultures at the factory. in the development of automated systems for cheese
Elimination of bulk culture preparation greatly reduced making. Along with the larger vats, equipment that
phage infection. could handle huge masses of curd efficiently was also

9958 JOHNSON
developed. This included drain tables or curd matting and lactose. As such, the Food and Drug Administra-
machines for separation of whey from curd as well as tion currently rules that after partial removal of whey
towers (to form 18-kg blocks) or large containers (to proteins, milk is no longer milk and cannot be used to
form 290-kg blocks) for production of cheeses such as make cheeses that have a standard of identity. There is
Cheddar, Colby, Muenster, and Monterey Jack. no such restriction on the use of membrane-filtered milk
The use of milks high in CN and fat has become com- in other countries. Cheeses that do not have a standard
monplace but requires judicious adherence to the best of identity can be made from microfiltered milk.
practices to enable the manufacture of cheese with the
desired melt, stretch, and machinability. One of these DAIRY CHEMISTRY PUT INTO PRACTICE
best practices is preacidification (addition of acid be-
fore addition of rennet). Much research has been done Cheese makers of old relied on their senses to make
exploring the best means to accomplish this (Metzger cheese. There were no means to detect the changes in
et al., 2000, 2001a,b; Nelson et al., 2004). Direct acid acidity caused by the fermentation of lactose by the
addition was initially used in the 1920s to correct for added starter bacteria (or natural fermentations before
poor-clotting milk but was popularized in the 1990s starters) other than by the feel of the curd. Yet the
with the increase in use of concentrated milks for cheese rate and extent of acid development are key parameters
manufacture. Breene et al. (1964) demonstrated that in developing the desired characteristics of cheese. The
no starter was needed for mozzarella (pizza cheese) be- first use of water to prevent excessive acidity is lost
cause acid could be added directly to the milk, and with to antiquity, but once used it opened up new frontiers
the addition of rennet the desired cheese would eventu- of cheese making and cheese types. Recognizing that
ally be obtained. Direct acidification, as it is called, acid development influenced characteristics of curds,
is now used for the manufacture of string cheese and technologists developed a means to detect changes
fresh mozzarella and is the basis for preacidification. to curd. The first test was a hot iron test. Curd was
Preacidification is widely used in the manufacture of squeezed into a mass, and the mass was then pushed
low-fat cheese and cheese made from milk with higher onto a hot iron or pipe until it bonded with the iron.
solids to aid curd fusion and lessen water migration The mass was pulled, and the length of stretch was
that occurs when large blocks of cheese are cooled. measured. The more acid produced in the curd, the
Increasing the fat or CN contents of milk will enhance longer the stretch. The relationship of the stretch to the
the yield of cheese. Cheeses that have a standard of attributes of the cheese was noted. Skilled practitioners
identity with fat of less than 50% on a dry basis require substantiated that the hot iron test could very accu-
the removal of cream from the milk or the addition of rately predict pH. Chemists have long used titration to
skim milk. Cream removal removes fat and some CN, measure acidity, and by the 1920s this method began
and the decrease in both results in a major decrease in to replace the hot iron test to determine the progress
cheese yield. In the 1950s, instead of removing cream, of fermentation. Widely used until recently, titratable
some cheese makers began to add CN to the milk in acidity became the measure of quality assurance during
the form of nonfat dry milk (generally rehydrated) or manufacture of cheese because it was easy to use and
condensed skim milk. However, use of condensed milk cost very little. Brown and Price (1934) advocated the
or nonfat dry milk is not without potential problems. use of pH measurements instead of titratable acidity,
Half of the solids in these ingredients is lactose. Exces- but pH measurement during cheese making did not
sive acid development in cheese could occur with high- become common until the 1980s.
lactose milks, wreaking havoc on cheese quality. How cheese is packaged and consumed has put a lot
The feasibility of using membrane filtration of milk of pressure on cheese makers to produce cheese with
to concentrate the fat and CN contents of milk and attributes that were not required in earlier times. Re-
remove water and lactose from milk was strongly ad- quirements by convertors include the ability to success-
vocated in the 1970s (Kosikowski, 1974; Maubois and fully shred, slice, and cube cheese without a lot of trim
Mocquot, 1975). Adoption of UF of milk for cheese loss. Application of cheese in food service, especially
making prevented excessive acid development as lactose in cooking or baking, requires specific melt and chew
was removed and increased the fat and CN contents of characteristics. The amount of calcium bound to CN,
milk, thus tremendously increasing cheese yield (Bush pH, and composition of cheese control the physical and
et al., 1983; Mistry et al., 1996; Brandsma and Rizvi, functional properties of cheese when it is heated. The
1999; Papadatos et al., 2003; Govindasamy-Lucey et rate and extent of acidification during cheese making
al., 2004; Nelson and Barbano, 2005; Moynihan et al., control the calcium content and pH of cheese (Lawrence
2016). Microfiltration is used to remove a portion of the et al., 1984) and are the chief principles governing the
whey proteins in addition to the water, soluble minerals, manufacture of cheese. However, the desired physical
and functional properties of cheese can be destroyed by addition of specific species of lactococci and Leuconos-
proteolysis (the breakdown or hydrolysis of protein). toc bacteria. Swiss cheese would be similar in flavor
Rennet used to clot the milk is a proteolytic enzyme to a high-moisture Parmesan without the addition of
and is the main culprit regarding excessive proteolysis propionibacteria. It is recognized that microorganisms
in cheese. Excessive proteolysis causes cheese to melt and enzymes can alter the flavor, body, and texture of
excessively with excessive free oil formation and will cheese. Therefore, it has become a major research ef-
result in a cheese that cannot be machined (sliced, fort by companies that supply these ripening agents to
cubed, or shredded). The shelf life of cheese, or the find microorganisms that will positively affect desirable
time that a cheese maintains its desired characteristics characteristics of cheese. The use of bacteria to develop
(flavor, body, and functionality), is shortened by ex- unique flavors has skyrocketed over the past 20 yr and
cessive proteolysis, which can destroy the best cheese. will continue. Within the past 10 yr, the development
Because of the importance of the chemical changes of genomics to quickly identify the microorganisms
that occur during manufacture and storage, there was found in cheese, especially in mold and surface-ripened
renewed interest in exploring these changes in more cheeses, has become a major effort in the search to un-
detail. Consequently, a lot of research was performed derstand the effect of various microorganisms on flavor
on the chemistry of melt, stretch, color, and texture of development and identify their habitat in the cheese
cheese (Keller et al., 1974; Yun et al., 1995; Guo et al., factory and at the farm. The study of microbiota ecol-
1997; Rudan and Barbano, 1998; McMahon et al., 1999; ogy during ripening has led to a new scientific area of
Rudan et al., 1999; Petersen et al., 2000; Metzger et study on chemical ecology. Microorganisms change the
al., 2001a,b; Feeney et al., 2002; Pastorino et al., 2002; chemical environment in cheese. This can alter the bio-
Broadbent et al., 2003; Lucey et al., 2003; Pastorino chemistry of cheese flavor development. Scientists are
et al., 2003a,b,c; Hassan et al., 2004; Lee et al., 2005; able to examine the genomic sequences of microorgan-
McMahon et al., 2005; O’Mahony et al., 2005; Upreti isms and can ascertain whether they have the poten-
et al., 2006; Foegeding and Drake, 2007; Banville et tial to develop desired flavor characteristics in cheese
al., 2013). Nutritional demands such as fat and sodium without any detrimental effects. The use of genetics to
reductions were also major influences on research, par- select bacteria for desired flavor development and to
ticularly in the 1990s (Johnson et al., 1995; Fife et al., discover bacteria with characteristics that inhibit the
1996; McMahon et al., 1996; Perry et al., 1997; Chen et growth of undesirable bacteria in cheese is the next
al., 1998; Mistry and Kasperson, 1998; Paulson et al., great adventure in cheese making technology.
1998; Rudan et al., 1998; Fenelon et al., 2000; Johnson However, from a manufacturing perspective, the en-
et al., 2001; Awad et al., 2005; Madadlou et al., 2005; hancement of flavor quality and quantity has remained
McMahon et al., 2005; Dabour et al., 2006; Rogers et a rather simplified protocol. It is generally limited in
al., 2009; Costa et al., 2010; Drake et al., 2010; Grum- practice to ripening cheese at elevated temperatures or
mer et al., 2013; Ozturk et al., 2013, 2015). to the addition of flavor-enhancing microorganisms and
enzymes. The main defects in cheese 100 yr ago were
RIPENING PRACTICES FOR CHEESE gassiness and unclean flavors. They often go hand in
hand. Cheese was generally stored at room temperature
Ripening of cheese refers to the development of flavor, or, if the cheese maker was fortunate, in caves built into
texture, and body characteristics of cheese. Ripening is sides of hills; however, this greatly enhanced the growth
the result of decomposition or breakdown of acids, fats, of coliforms and other undesirables. Refrigeration of
and protein due to metabolism of microorganisms and cheese greatly improved cheese quality (Wilson et al.,
activity of enzymes. The development of flavor in dairy 1941). The latter reference contains a great discussion
products has received considerable attention, especially on the early work of many researchers, including the
for the contribution of enzymes and microbiota, both of initial work on refrigeration of cheese by Babcock and
which may be naturally present or added intentionally Russell (1902). All reports demonstrate that cooler
to the milk or cheese (Molimard and Spinnler, 1996; temperatures resulted in better quality cheese. Bacte-
Lynch et al., 1999; El Soda et al., 2000; Madkor et al., riological quality of milk was poor, and contamination
2000). Blue cheese would be feta cheese and Camem- of milk and cheese with coliforms was very common.
bert would be similar to chevre without the addition Coliforms produced both gas and undesirable flavors.
of specific species of Penicillium mold. Provolone and The use of pasteurized milk for cheese making was in
Romano cheese flavor would be similar to mozzarella large part to cure these issues. The destruction of co-
or Parmesan, respectively, without the addition of li- liforms as well as many other bacteria that may have
pase enzymes. Gouda and Havarti would be similar in contributed to the development of desirable flavor in
flavor to Colby or high-fat brick cheese without the cheese had consequences. In response to the lack of
9960 JOHNSON
flavor development in Cheddar cheese made from pas- prevent growth of contaminating mold spores. Wash-
teurized milk, Harris and Hammer (1940) tested the ington State University began experimenting with vac-
addition of specific bacteria that were initially isolated uum-sealed cans. This process is currently used in their
from good-tasting cheese made from raw milk. It is now popular Cougar Gold cheese. Today, vacuum sealing
common practice in some cheese varieties, especially of packaged block-shaped cheeses and gas flushing of
Cheddar, Parmesan, and aged Gouda, to add adjunct plastic bags of shredded cheese with mixtures of carbon
bacteria, mostly Lactobacillus species, to milk to devel- dioxide and nitrogen are popular for mass distribution.
op unique flavors in cheese that are unlikely to develop Undoubtedly, the increased consumption of cheese is
without the addition of such bacteria. Almost all of the attributable in large part to the convenient forms of
work done on isolation of these strains is performed in presenting cheese to the consumer. The small blocks of
private commercial entities, but there are exceptions cheese were not practical for the convertors. Cheese fac-
(Lynch et al., 1999; Swearingen et al., 2001). Addition tories switched back to the larger forms, 9- and 18-kg
of adjuncts may include species of bacteria that inhibit blocks. However, Swiss cheese went from 90-kg wheels
undesirable bacteria in cheese and may include species to 10-kg block form. Retailer demand for packages of
considered to be probiotics. Enzymatic activity and exact weight resulted in a lot of trim loss from the
microbial growth are essential for developing cheese larger blocks because they were not of perfect size and
flavor, and their contribution to flavor is accelerated weight for this style. Eventually, much larger blocks
by ripening at warmer temperatures. Using elevated of cheese called 640s, weighing roughly between 304
temperatures to reduce the time and cost of develop- and 313 kg, substantially reduced trim loss, but they
ing the desired flavor attributes of cheese has potential are not without issues. Moisture migration within the
drawbacks. Defects associated with improperly made block produced higher moisture on the outer portions
and ripened cheese include gas formation leading to and reduced moisture in the inner portions (as much as
splits in cheese (Ortakci et al., 2015) or sweating (liquid 4–6 percentage points; Reinbold and Ernstrom, 1988;
expulsion) leading to calcium lactate crystal formation Reinbold et al., 1992). Convertors found at times that
on the surface of Cheddar cheese (Chou et al., 2003; inner portions were not conducive to rapid slicing or
Swearingen et al., 2004; Agarwal et al., 2006). shredding because the cheese was brittle or that the
outer portions were too pasty to machine. The influ-
CHEESE PACKAGING ence on flavor of added enzymes and adjunct cultures
could be exacerbated based on location within the large
In 1917, cheese was not sold in the convenient forms block of cheese (Carunchia Whetstine et al., 2007), but
we enjoy today (i.e., shreds, slices, small blocks of this was generally not as much of a concern as the in-
227–454 g). Factory-made cheese, especially Cheddar, ability to machine the cheese.
was ripened in large blocks that were coated with lard Cheese marketing has in some respects reinvented it-
or cheese grease to protect them from drying out exces- self over the last 15 yr. With the popularity of “fancy,”
sively. Rinds, or a hard outer layer of cheese, still devel- specialty, artisanal, or farmstead cheeses, cheeses di-
oped and had to be cut from the cheese before sale. This rectly cut from the block or individually cut, wrapped,
trim resulted in a lot of waste. The traditional practice and weighed at the retailer have reversed the trend of
of ripening cheese has returned today as artisans have having convertors package cheese.
rediscovered the unique flavor of cloth-bound Cheddar.
By 1917, cheese grease was largely replaced by paraf- WHEY PROCESSING
fin, which prevented drying, created no rind, and was
easily removed from the cheese. Wax coating was also a Cheese production means whey production. In the
means to prevent drying but was done just before sale early days of cheese making, whey was fed to livestock
of the cheese to the market. Smaller blocks (2.3–4.5 or otherwise discarded. The development of mechanical
kg) of Cheddar (called daisy, gems, favorites, young separation of the fat in whey allowed the manufacture
Americans, and midgets, to name a few) were becoming of whey cream butter. Grade A butter can be made
popular for sale out of convenience to the grocer, who from sweet cream only. It was uneconomical for small
then cut the cheese into smaller units as the customer factories to process whey because the volumes of whey
asked for it. Labor costs were high, and the marketing were small (Webb and Whittier, 1948). Prior to the
of cheese was handicapped by the unsuitability of the 1920s, lactose was derived from skim milk. Bell et al.
packaging for modern methods of merchandizing (Rog- (1928) developed a process of removing lactose and
ers, 1932). Ripening or storage of cheese in cans was other solids from whey, but most of the work on whey
introduced in 1904. Gas-venting valves that facilitated processing was in the form of patents. Whey processing
air removal were introduced in the 1930s and helped eventually transformed from whey cream production to
protein concentrates and lactose. The change in milk the changes made from the early 1900s to the 1950s,
pricing to component pricing greatly accelerated the Price (1956) wrote eloquently about changes in the
development of whey-based ingredients. The develop- art, which was in essence the history of cheese mak-
ment of membrane filtration of whey enabled a more ing. Olson (1970, 1981) wrote about the changes in
economically viable process and resulted in the devel- the mechanization and automation, and Johnson and
opment of many types of whey-based ingredients. A Lucey (2006) characterized additional changes. This
major drawback to the sale of products derived from review does not cover all the changes to equipment
whey in which annatto color has been added (Cheddar for all cheese types, but innovation has occurred in all
and Colby) to the milk is that buyers do not want color types of cheese. In some regards, the manufacture of
in the product. To appease the buyers, McDonough et cheese in small factories is quite the same as it was
al. (1968) promoted the use of hydrogen peroxide to 100 yr ago but with equipment made of stainless steel
bleach the color. Unfortunately, this led to off-flavors in and electric motors and pumps. The cheese produced
the whey products (Croissant et al., 2009; Kang et al., today is of much higher caliber and more consistent
2010; Jervis et al., 2012). Some buyers do not accept in quality than that produced in 1917. One hundred
the bleaching of whey or the addition of color to milk. years ago, educators believed that cheese makers were
This is especially true for whey-derived ingredients inclined to follow the same routine they had always
for baby food formulas. Consequently, there is special known and that they seldom possessed any scientific
impetus to legalize the microfiltration of milk before comprehension of the process they used. The cheese
cheese is made to remove a portion of whey proteins industry would not be as robust today if that were true.
and lactose from milk before cheese making and the To be efficient, factory cheese making requires fixed
addition of color. time processes, which in turn require milk of high qual-
ity. The use of pasteurized milk for cheese making,
CHEESE SAFETY: MANDATORY INSPECTION increased herd size, and the increased need to process
OF CHEESE PLANTS milk into cheese require mechanization and automation
and knowledge of how this technology works. Using
Although illness due to consumption of cheese is rare, mechanization and automation to their fullest potential
the US government has zero tolerance for pathogens in requires the development of starter cultures with de-
cheese. This has set in motion a major debate on the pendable performance and the knowledge of the cheese
abolition of raw milk for cheese making. Pasteuriza- maker to use them appropriately. Efficient use of the
tion of milk for cheese making does not ensure that equipment and the need to improve cheese yield are at
the cheese will be free from pathogens, but it would the forefront with membrane processing of milk, but
be if postpasteurization contamination of cheese can changes to the regulations will be required to allow for
be avoided. This may not be the case for cheeses made its full potential. Increased cheese production requires
from raw milk, especially those in which the acidity is increased promotion of cheese utilization. Changes in
low. Implementation of rules and procedures to ensure handling, utilization, and presentation of cheese require
the safety of all cheeses will become mandatory. As knowledge of the chemistry and enzymology of cheese
part of the Food Safety and Modernization Act, signed manufacture and ripening. Education of cheese mak-
on January 4, 2011, all cheese plants must maintain ers and those who will conduct the next generation of
and implement a food safety plan. Its aims are to shift research is also of utmost importance.
the focus from responding to contamination of food by Although exceptional progress has been made in the
pathogens to preventing it. The food safety plan must mechanization and automation of cheese making, there
contain provisions such as hazard analysis, preventative is still a need to refine the cheese making process to
controls, monitoring procedures, and a plan for cor- consistently produce cheese with the desired character-
rective action. It also includes a program for training istics. Membrane processing of milk and whey will of-
workers on good manufacturing practices. Mandatory fer excellent opportunities to manufacture cheese with
implementation of the act is required in all cheese consistent functionality and use for milk components in
plants by 2018. Larger cheese plants had to comply by an economically sound manner, but only if all the frac-
September 2016. tions of milk are used. Membrane processing also offers
a means to recover water, and there is great potential
SUMMARY AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS for this water to be recycled in the cheese plant.
Changes to Code of Federal Regulations Title 21
Cheese making in the United States has progressed (CFR, 2017) will be necessary to allow the use of milk
from small quantities produced on the farm to mega separated through membrane processing for cheese
quantities produced in factories. In his commentary on making, and it will be a priority for the cheese industry.
9962 JOHNSON
A point of concern is the necessity of using terms on Babcock, S. M. 1890. A new method for the estimation of fat in milk.
Agri. Expt. Sta. Bull. 24. Univ. Wisconsin, Madison, WI.
the labels of cheese that was produced from milk using Babcock, S. M., and H. L. Russell. 1902. Curing of Cheddar cheese
membrane processing (i.e., UF, diafiltration, and mi- with special reference to cold-curing. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 94. Univ.
crofiltration). These terms are not well understood by Wisconsin, Madison, WI..
Bachmann, H. P., and U. Spahr. 1995. The fate of potentially patho-
consumers and may lead to apprehension about cheeses genic bacteria in Swiss hard and semihard cheeses made from raw
made using milk concentrated or separated by these milk. J. Dairy Sci. 78:476–483.
processes. Other countries do not have to indicate the Banville, V., P. Morin, Y. Pouliot, and M. Britten. 2013. Physical
properties of pizza Mozzarella cheese manufactured under different
use of membrane-filtered milks because they consider cheese-making conditions. J. Dairy Sci. 96:4804–4815.
them all to be milks and simply put “milk” as the ingre- Bell, R. W., P. N. Peter, and W. M. T. Johnson Jr.. 1928. A method
dient on the labels. The development of new products of obtaining crude milk sugar and other solids from sweet whey. J.
Dairy Sci. 11:163–174.
and utilization of milk components to their greatest Brandsma, R. L., and S. S. H. Rizvi. 1999. Depletion of whey pro-
advantage will also offer a new direction to improve teins and calcium by microfiltration of acidified skim milk prior to
cheese quality and sustainability of resources. Code of cheese making. J. Dairy Sci. 82:2063–2069.
Breene, W. M., W. V. Price, and C. A. Ernstrom. 1964. Manufacture
Federal Regulations Title 21 defines what ingredients of pizza cheese without starter. J. Dairy Sci. 47:1173–1180.
can be used to make cheese, lists the compositional Broadbent, J. R., D. J. McMahon, D. L. Welker, C. J. Oberg, and S.
requirements for certain cheeses (standard of identity), Moineau. 2003. Biochemistry, genetics, and applications of exo-
polysaccharide production in Streptococcus thermophilus: A review.
and gives a rough outline of how these cheeses can be J. Dairy Sci. 86:407–423.
made. If a cheese does not have a standard of identity, Brown, L. W., and W. V. Price. 1934. A study of the relationship be-
no compositional requirements exist. tween hydrogen ion concentration, titratable acidity, and quality
of Cheddar cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 17:33–45.
Major undesirable traits of cheese are the lack of fla- Bush, C. S., C. A. Garoutte, C. H. Amundson, and N. F. Olson. 1983.
vor intensity and poor flavor quality. This has plagued Manufacture of Colby and brick cheeses from ultrafiltered milk. J.
cheese makers since the beginning. Perhaps it is just Dairy Sci. 66:415–421.
Carunchia Whetstine, M. E., P. J. Luck, M. A. Drake, E. A. Foeged-
implementation of the technology already available, ing, P. D. Gerard, and D. M. Barbano. 2007. Characterization of
but perhaps it is that the technology is lacking. If the flavor and texture development within large (291 kg) blocks of
latter is the case, renewed emphasis on flavor develop- Cheddar cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 90:3091–3109.
Chen, M., J. Irudayarai, and D. J. McMahon. 1998. Examination of
ment in cheese is warranted, especially in relation to full fat and reduced fat Cheddar cheese during ripening by Fourier
reduced-sodium and reduced-fat cheeses. The linkage transform infrared spectroscopy. J. Dairy Sci. 81:2791–2797.
of genetic research and biochemistry of microorganisms Chou, Y.-E., C. G. Edwards, L. O. Luedecke, M. P. Bates, and S.
Clark. 2003. Nonstarter lactic acid bacteria and aging temperature
is underway and has great potential to enhance flavor affect calcium lactate crystallization in Cheddar cheese. J. Dairy
development and the safety of cheese. Sci. 86:2516–2524.
The number of faculty devoted to full-time dairy re- Clark, W. M. 1917. On the formation of “eyes” in Emmental cheese.
J. Dairy Sci. 1:91–113.
search has declined, as has the number of universities Code of Federal Regulations. 2017. Title 21: Food and Drugs. Chap-
with devoted dairy foods curricula and the financial ter 1, Part 133. Accessed Mar. 20, 2017. https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi
resources to conduct research and training. These de- -bin/text-idx?SID=c030dd7e003ccd2fe51dfea5afddc194&mc=true
&node=pt21.2.133&rgn=div5.
clines will have serious negative consequences for the Cogan, T. M., T. P. Beresford, J. Steele, J. Broadbent, N. P. Shah, and
cheese manufacturing industry and associated indus- Z. Ustanol. 2007. Invited review: Advances in starter cultures and
tries supplying starters and coagulants, equipment, cultured foods. J. Dairy Sci. 90:4005–4021.
Combs, W. B., W. H. Martin, and N. A. Hugglar. 1924. Clarification
converters of cheese (packaging), end users (pizzerias, of milk for cheese making. J. Dairy Sci. 7:524–529.
chefs), and retail outlets. Demand for trained person- Costa, N. E., J. A. Hannon, T. P. Guinee, M. A. E. Auty, P. L. H.
nel by industry and academia is, and will be, high. McSweeney, and T. P. Beresford. 2010. Effect of exopolysaccharide
produced by isogenic strains of Lactococcus lactis on half-fat Ched-
Continued training of current and future employees will dar cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 93:3469–3486.
be necessary for a vital dairy industry and may require Croissant, A. E., E. J. Kang, R. E. Campbell, E. Bastian, and M. A.
different approaches, perhaps as was done 100 yr ago Drake. 2009. The effect of bleaching agent on the flavor of liquid
whey and whey protein concentrate. J. Dairy Sci. 92:5917–5927.
with dedicated dairy manufacturing curricula. Dabour, N., E. Kheadr, N. Benhamou, I. Fliss, and G. LaPointe. 2006.
Improvement of texture and structure of reduced-fat Cheddar
cheese by exopolysaccharide-producing lactococci. J. Dairy Sci.
REFERENCES 89:95–110.
De Marchi, M., G. Bittante, R. Dal Zotto, C. Daluit, and M. Cassan-
Agarwal, S., J. R. Powers, B. G. Swanson, S. Chen, and S. Clark.
dro. 2008. Effect of Holstein Friesian and Brown Swiss breeds on
2006. Cheese pH, protein concentration, and formation of calcium
quality of milk and cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 91:4092–4102.
lactate crystals. J. Dairy Sci. 89:4144–4155.
Drake, M. A., R. E. Miracle, and D. J. McMahon. 2010. Impact of fat
Albright, J. L., S. L. Tuckey, and G. T. Woods. 1961. Antibiotics in
reduction on flavor and flavor chemistry of Cheddar cheeses. J.
milk—A review. J. Dairy Sci. 44:779–807.
Dairy Sci. 93:5069–5081.
Awad, S., A. N. Hassan, and F. Halaweish. 2005. Application of exo-
el-Gazzar, F. E., and E. Marth. 1992. Salmonellae, salmonellosis, and
polysaccharide-producing cultures in reduced fat Cheddar cheese:
dairy foods: A review. J. Dairy Sci. 75:2327–2343.
Composition and proteolysis. J. Dairy Sci. 88:4195–4203.

El Soda, M., S. A. Madkor, and P. S. Tong. 2000. Adjunct cultures: Johnson, M. E., C. M. Chen, and J. J. Jaeggi. 2001. Effect of rennet
Recent developments and potential significance to the cheese in- coagulation time on composition, yield, and quality of reduced-fat
dustry. J. Dairy Sci. 83:609–619. Cheddar cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 84:1027–1033.
Emmons, D. B., and H. W. Modler. 2010. Invited review: A com- Johnson, M. E., and J. A. Lucey. 2006. Major technological advances
mentary on the predictive cheese yield formulas. J. Dairy Sci. and trends in cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 89:1174–1178.
93:5517–5537. Kang, E. J., R. E. Campbell, E. Bastian, and M. A. Drake. 2010. In-
Feeney, E. P., T. P. Guinee, and P. F. Fox. 2002. Effect of pH and vited review: Annatto usage and bleaching in dairy foods. J. Dairy
calcium concentration on proteolysis in Mozzarella cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 93:3891–3901.
Sci. 85:1646–1654. Katznelson, H., and E. G. Hood. 1949. Influence of penicillin and other
Fenelon, M. A., and T. P. Guinee. 1999. The effect of milk fat on antibiotics on lactic streptococci in starter cultures used in Ched-
Cheddar cheese yield and its prediction, using modifications of the dar cheesemaking. J. Dairy Sci. 32:961–968.
Van Slyke cheese yield formula. J. Dairy Sci. 82:2287–2299. Keller, B., N. F. Olson, and T. Richardson. 1974. Mineral retention
Fenelon, M. A., P. O’Connor, and T. P. Guinee. 2000. The effect of and rheological properties of Mozzarella cheese made by direct
fat content on the microbiology and proteolysis in Cheddar cheese acidification. J. Dairy Sci. 57:174–180.
during ripening. J. Dairy Sci. 83:2173–2183. Kelly, C. D. 1939. Studies on the control of gas in Limburger cheese.
Fife, R. L., D. J. McMahon, and C. J. Oberg. 1996. Functionality of J. Dairy Sci. 22:299–307.
low fat Mozzarella cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 79:1903–1910. Klei, L., J. Yun, A. Sapru, J. Lynch, D. Barbano, P. Sears, and D.
Foegeding, E. A., and M. A. Drake. 2007. Invited review: Sensory and Galton. 1998. Effects of somatic cell count on cottage cheese yield
mechanical properties of cheese texture. J. Dairy Sci. 90:1611– and quality. J. Dairy Sci. 81:1205–1213.
1624. Knaysi, G., and M. Ford. 1938. A method of counting viable bacteria
Govindasamy-Lucey, S., J. J. Jaeggi, A. L. Bostley, M. E. Johnson, in milk by means of the microscope. J. Dairy Sci. 21:129–141.
and J. A. Lucey. 2004. Standardization of milk using cold ultra- Kosikowski, F. V. 1961. An inquiring look at antibiotic residue control.
filtration retentates for the manufacture of Parmesan cheese. J. J. Dairy Sci. 57:488–491.
Dairy Sci. 87:2789–2799. Kosikowski, F. V. 1974. Cheesemaking by ultrafiltration. J. Dairy Sci.
Grummer, J., N. Bobowski, M. Karalus, Z. Vikars, and T. Schoenfuss. 57:488–491.
2013. Use of potassium chloride and flavor enhancers in low so- Latorre, A. A., J. S. Van Kessel, J. S. Karns, M. J. Zurakowski, A. K.
dium cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 96:1401–1418. Pradhan, K. J. Boor, B. M. Jayarao, B. A. Houser, C. S. Daugh-
Guinee, T. P., E. O. Mulholland, J. Kelly, and D. J. O. Callaghan. erty, and Y. H. Schukken. 2010. Biofilm in milking equipment on a
2007. Effect of protein-to-fat ratio of milk on the composition, dairy farm as a potential source of bulk tank milk contamination
manufacturing efficiency, and yield of Cheddar cheese. J. Dairy with Listeria monocytogenes. J. Dairy Sci. 93:2792–2802.
Sci. 90:110–123. Lawrence, R. C., H. A. Heap, and J. Gilles. 1984. A controlled ap-
Guinee, T. P., B. T. O’Kennedy, and P. M. Kelly. 2006. Effect of milk proach to cheese making. J. Dairy Sci. 67:1632–1645.
protein standardization using different methods on the composi- Lay, A. M., K. M. Kolpin, D. A. Sommer, and S. A. Rankin. 2007. Hot
tion and yields of Cheddar cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 89:468–482. topic: Black spot defect in Cheddar cheese linked to intramam-
Guo, M. R., J. A. Gilmore, and P. S. Kindstedt. 1997. Effect of sodium mary teat sealant. J. Dairy Sci. 90:4938–4941.
chloride on the serum phase of Mozzarella cheese. J. Dairy Sci. Lee, M.-R., M. E. Johnson, and J. A. Lucey. 2005. Impact of modifi-
80:3092–3098. cations in acid development on the insoluble calcium content and
Harris, W. C., and B. W. Hammer. 1940. Effect of various bacteria rheological properties of Cheddar cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 88:3798–
on flavor of cheddar cheese made from pasteurized milk. J. Dairy 3809.
Sci. 23:701–708. Lee, S. H. I., B. L. C. Mangolin, J. L. Gonçalves, D. V. Neeff, M. P.
Hassan, A., M. E. Johnson, and J. A. Lucey. 2004. Changes in the Silva, A. G. Cruz, and C. A. F. Oliveira. 2014. Biofilm-produc-
proportions of soluble and insoluble calcium during the ripening of ing ability of Staphylococcus aureus isolates from Brazilian dairy
Cheddar cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 87:854–862. farms. J. Dairy Sci. 97:1812–1816.
Hlynka, I., E. G. Hood, and C. A. Gibson. 1943. Agitation and tem- Lilbaek, H. M., M. L. Broe, E. Høier, T. M. Fatum, R. Ipsen, and N.
perature of cheese milk and the development of rancid and unclean K. Sørensen. 2006. Improving the yield of Mozzarella cheese by
flavors in Cheddar cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 26:1111–1119. phospholipase treatment of milk. J. Dairy Sci. 89:4114–4125.
Huxley, J. N., M. J. Green, L. E. Green, and A. J. Bradley. 2002. Lopez-Fandiňo, R., A. V. Carrascosa, and A. Olano. 1996. The effects
Evaluation of the efficacy of an internal teat sealer during the dry of high pressure on whey protein denaturation and cheese-making
period. J. Dairy Sci. 85:551–561. properties of raw milk. J. Dairy Sci. 79:929–936.
Jaeggi, J. J., S. Govindasamy-Lucey, Y. M. Berger, M. E. Johnson, Lucey, J. A., M. E. Johnson, and D. S. Horne. 2003. Invited review:
B. C. McKusick, D. L. Thomas, and W. L. Wendorff. 2003. Hard Perspectives on the basis of the rheology and texture properties of
ewe’s milk cheese manufactured from milk of three different groups cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 86:2725–2743.
of somatic cell counts. J. Dairy Sci. 86:3082–3089. Lundén, J., R. Tolvanen, and H. Korkeala. 2004. Human listerio-
Jervis, S., R. Campbell, K. L. Wojciechowski, E. A. Foegeding, M. A. sis outbreaks linked to dairy products in Europe. J. Dairy Sci.
Drake, and D. M. Barbano. 2012. Effect of bleaching whey on sen- 87(Suppl.):E6–E12.
sory and functional properties of 80% whey protein concentrate. J. Lynch, C. M., D. D. Muir, J. M. Banks, P. L. H. McSweeney, and P. F.
Dairy Sci. 95:2848–2862. Fox. 1999. Influence of adjunct cultures of Lactobacillus paracasei
Jindal, S., S. Anand, K. Huang, J. Goddard, L. Metzger, and J. Ama- ssp. paracasei or Lactobacillus plantarum on Cheddar cheese ripen-
mcharla. 2016. Evaluation of modified stainless steel surfaces tar- ing. J. Dairy Sci. 82:1618–1628.
geted to reduce biofilm formation by common milk sporeformers. Madadlou, A., A. Khosroshani, and M. E. Mousavi. 2005. Rheol-
J. Dairy Sci. 99:9502–9513. ogy, microstructure, and functionality of low-fat Iranian white
Johns, A. T. 1953. Differences in sensitivity of lactic starters to antibi- cheese made with different concentrations of rennet. J. Dairy Sci.
otics. J. Dairy Sci. 36:1241–1247. 88:3052–3062.
Johnson, J. A. C., M. R. Etzel, C. M. Chen, and M. E. Johnson. 1995. Madkor, S. A., P. S. Tong, and M. El Soda. 2000. Ripening of Cheddar
Accelerated ripening of reduced-fat Cheddar cheese using four at- cheese with attenuated adjunct cultures of lactobacilli. J. Dairy
tenuated Lactobacillus helveticus CNRZ-32 adjuncts. J. Dairy Sci. Sci. 83:1684–1691.
78:769–776. Maubois, J. L., and G. Mocquot. 1975. Application of membrane ul-
Johnson, M. E. 2014. Mesophilic and thermophilic cultures used in trafiltration to preparation of various types of cheese. J. Dairy Sci.
traditional cheesemaking. Pages 73-94 in Cheese and Microbes. C. 58:1001–1007.
W. Donnelly, ed. American Society for Microbiology Press, Wash-
ington, DC.

9964 JOHNSON
McDonough, F. E., R. E. Hargrove, and R. P. Tittsler. 1968. Decolor- Pastorino, A. J., R. I. Dave, C. J. Oberg, and D. J. McMahon. 2002.
ization of annatto in Cheddar cheese whey. J. Dairy Sci. 51:471– Temperature effect on structure–opacity relationships of nonfat
472. Mozzarella cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 85:2106–2113.
McEwen, S. A., W. D. Black, and A. H. Meek. 1991. Antibiotic residue Pastorino, A. J., C. L. Hansen, and D. J. McMahon. 2003a. Effect of
prevention methods, farm management, and occurrence of antibi- salt on structure–function relationships of cheese. J. Dairy Sci.
otic residues in milk. J. Dairy Sci. 74:2128–2137. 86:60–69.
McKay, L. L., K. A. Baldwin, and J. D. Efstathiou. 1976. Transduc- Pastorino, A. J., C. L. Hansen, and D. J. McMahon. 2003b. Effect of
tional evidence for plasmid linkage of lactose metabolism in Strep- pH on the chemical composition and structure–function relation-
tococcus lactis C2. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 32:45–52. ships of Cheddar cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 86:2751–2760.
McMahon, D. J., M. C. Alleyne, R. L. Fife, and C. J. Oberg. 1996. Pastorino, A. J., N. P. Ricks, C. L. Hansen, and D. J. McMahon.
Use of fat replacers in low fat Mozzarella cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 2003c. Effect of calcium and water injection on structure–function
79:1911–1921. relationships of cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 86:105–113.
McMahon, D. J., R. L. Fife, and C. J. Oberg. 1999. Water partitioning Paulson, B. M., D. J. McMahon, and C. J. Oberg. 1998. Influence of
in Mozzarella cheese and its relationship to cheese meltability. J. sodium chloride on appearance, functionality, and protein arrange-
Dairy Sci. 82:1361–1369. ments in nonfat Mozzarella cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 81:2053–2064.
McMahon, D. J., B. Paulson, and C. J. Oberg. 2005. Influence of Pearson, L. J., and E. Marth. 1990. Listeria monocytogenes—Threat
calcium, pH, and moisture on protein matrix structure and func- to a safe food supply: A review. J. Dairy Sci. 73:912–928.
tionality in direct-acidified nonfat Mozzarella cheese. J. Dairy Sci. Perry, D. B., D. J. McMahon, and C. J. Oberg. 1997. Effect of exo-
88:3754–3763. polysaccharide-producing cultures on moisture retention in low fat
Metzger, L. E., D. M. Barbano, and P. S. Kindstedt. 2001a. Effect of Mozzarella cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 80:799–805.
milk preacidification on low fat Mozzarella cheese. III. Post-melt Petersen, B. L., R. I. Dave, D. J. McMahon, C. J. Oberg, and J. R.
chewiness and whiteness. J. Dairy Sci. 84:1357–1366. Broadbent. 2000. Influence of capsular and ropy exopolysaccha-
Metzger, L. E., D. M. Barbano, P. S. Kindstedt, and M. R. Guo. ride-producing Streptococcus thermophilus on Mozzarella cheese
2001b. Effect of milk preacidification on low fat Mozzarella cheese. and cheese whey. J. Dairy Sci. 83:1952–1956.
II. Chemical and functional properties during storage. J. Dairy Phillips, C. A. 1928. The effect of flash pasteurization of milk upon
Sci. 84:1348–1356. the flavor and texture of Cheddar cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 11:292–298.
Metzger, L. E., D. M. Barbano, M. A. Rudan, and P. S. Kindstedt. Price, W. V. 1927. Cheddar cheese from pasteurized milk. J. Dairy
2000. Effect of milk preacidification on low fat Mozzarella cheese. Sci. 10:155–168.
I. Composition and yield. J. Dairy Sci. 83:648–658. Price, W. V. 1956. Cheese manufacture. J. Dairy Sci. 39:824–832.
Mistry, V. V., and K. M. Kasperson. 1998. Influence of salt on the Ramsaran, H., J. Chen, B. Brunke, A. Hill, and M. W. Griffiths. 1998.
quality of reduced fat Cheddar cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 81:1214–1221. Survival of bioluminescent Listeria monocytogenes and Escherichia
Mistry, V. V., L. E. Metzger, and J. L. Maubois. 1996. Use of ultrafil- coli O157:H7 in soft cheeses. J. Dairy Sci. 81:1810–1817.
tered sweet buttermilk in the manufacture of reduced fat Cheddar Reinbold, R. S., and C. A. Ernstrom. 1988. Effect of non-uniform cool-
cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 79:1137–1145. ing on moisture, salt, and pH distribution in 290-kg stirred curd
Molimard, P., and H. E. Spinnler. 1996. Review: Compounds involved Cheddar cheese blocks. J. Dairy Sci. 71:2071–2082.
in the flavor of surface mold-ripened cheeses: Origins and proper- Reinbold, R. S., C. A. Ernstrom, and C. L. Hansen. 1992. Tempera-
ties. J. Dairy Sci. 79:169–184. ture, pH, and moisture profiles during cooling of 290-kg stirred
Moynihan, A. C., S. Govindasamy-Lucey, M. Molitor, J. J. Jaeggi, M. curd Cheddar cheese blocks. J. Dairy Sci. 75:2071–2082.
E. Johnson, P. L. H. McSweeney, and J. A. Lucey. 2016. Effect Richardson, G. H., C. T. Cheng, and R. Young. 1977. Lactic bulk
of standardizing the lactose content of cheesemilk on the proper- starter system utilizing a whey-based bacteriophage medium and
ties of low-moisture, part skim Mozzarella cheese. J. Dairy Sci. pH control. I. Application to American style cheese. J. Dairy Sci.
99:7791–7802. 60:378–386.
Nelson, B. K., and D. M. Barbano. 2005. Microfiltration process to Rogers, L. A. 1932. Ripening cheese in a sealed package. J. Dairy Sci.
maximize removal of serum proteins from skim milk before cheese 15:185–265.
making. J. Dairy Sci. 88:1891–1900. Rogers, N. R., M. A. Drake, C. R. Daubert, D. J. McMahon, T. K.
Nelson, B. K., J. L. Lynch, and D. M. Barbano. 2004. Impact of Bletsch, and E. A. Foegeding. 2009. Effect of aging on low-fat,
milk preacidification with CO2 on Cheddar cheese composition and reduced-fat, and full-fat Cheddar cheese texture. J. Dairy Sci.
yield. J. Dairy Sci. 87:3581–3589. 92:4756–4772.
O’Mahony, J. A., J. A. Lucey, and P. L. H. McSweeney. 2005. Chy- Romero, D. A., and T. R. Klaenhammer. 1993. Transposable elements
mosin-mediated proteolysis, calcium solubilization, and texture in lactococci: A review. J. Dairy Sci. 76:1–19.
development during the ripening of Cheddar cheese. J. Dairy Sci. Rudan, M. A., and D. M. Barbano. 1998. A model of Mozzarella
88:3101–3114. cheese melting and browning during pizza baking. J. Dairy Sci.
Olson, N. F. 1970. Automation in the cheese industry: A review. J. 81:2312–2319.
Dairy Sci. 53:1144–1150. Rudan, M. A., D. M. Barbano, M. R. Guo, and P. S. Kindstedt. 1998.
Olson, N. F. 1981. Trends in cheese manufacture. J. Dairy Sci. Effect of the modification of fat particle size by homogenization on
64:1063–1069. composition, proteolysis, functionality, and appearance of reduced
Ortakci, F., J. R. Broadbent, C. J. Oberg, and D. J. McMahon. 2015. fat Mozzarella cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 81:2065–2076.
Growth and gas production of a novel obligatory heterofermenta- Rudan, M. A., D. M. Barbano, J. J. Yun, and P. S. Kindstedt. 1999.
tive Cheddar cheese nonstarter lactobacilli species on ribose and Effect of fat reduction on chemical composition, proteolysis, func-
galactose. J. Dairy Sci. 98:3645–3654. tionality, and yield of Mozzarella cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 82:661–672.
Ozturk, M., S. Govindasamy–Lucey, J. J. Jaeggi, K. Houck, M. E. Rudnick, A. W. 1919. Butter milk cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 2:41–45.
Johnson, and J. A. Lucey. 2013. Effect of various high-pressure Sammis, J. L., and A. T. Bruhn. 1912. The Manufacture of Cheddar
treatments on the properties of reduced-fat Cheddar cheese. J. Cheese from Pasteurized Milk. Vol. 27. The University of Wiscon-
Dairy Sci. 96:6792–6806. sin Agricultural Experiment Station, Madison.
Ozturk, M., S. Govindasamy-Lucey, J. J. Jaeggi, M. E. Johnson, and Sanders, M. E., P. J. Leonhard, W. D. Sing, and T. R. Klaenhammer.
J. A. Lucey. 2015. Low sodium Cheddar cheese: Effect of fortifica- 1986. Conjugal strategy for construction of fast acid-producing,
tion of cheese milk with ultrafiltration retentate and high-hydro- bacteriophage-resistant lactic streptococci for use in dairy fermen-
static pressure treatment of cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 98:6713–6726. tations. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 52:1001–1007.
Papadatos, A., M. Neocleous, A. M. Berger, and D. M. Barbano. 2003. Somers, E. B., M. E. Johnson, and A. C. L. Wong. 2001. Biofilm
Economic feasibility evaluation of microfiltration of milk prior to formation and contamination of cheese by nonstarter lactic acid
cheesemaking. J. Dairy Sci. 86:1564–1577. bacteria in the dairy environment. J. Dairy Sci. 84:1926–1936.

Stephan, R., S. Schumacher, S. Corti, G. Krause, J. Danuser, and Wedholm, A., L. B. Larsen, H. Lindmark-Månsson, A. H. Karlsson,
L. Beutin. 2008. Prevalence and characteristics of Shiga toxin- and A. Andrén. 2006. Effect of protein composition on cheese-
producing Escherichia coli in Swiss raw milk cheeses collected at making properties of milk from milk of individual dairy cows. J.
producer level. J. Dairy Sci. 91:2561–2565. Dairy Sci. 89:3296–3305.
Swearingen, P. A., D. E. Adams, and T. L. Lensmire. 2004. Factors Whitehead, W. E., J. W. Ayres, and W. E. Sandine. 1993. A review
affecting calcium lactate and liquid expulsion defects in Cheddar of starter media for cheese making. J. Dairy Sci. 76:2344–2353.
cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 87:574–582. Wilson, H. L., S. A. Hall, and W. T. Johnson. 1941. Relationship of
Swearingen, P. A., D. J. O’Sullivan, and J. J. Warthesen. 2001. Isola- curing temperatures to quality of American Cheddar cheese. J.
tion, characterization, and influence of native, nonstarter lactic Dairy Sci. 24:169–177.
acid bacteria in Cheddar cheese quality. J. Dairy Sci. 84:50–59. Wilson, H. L., S. A. Hall, and L. A. Rogers. 1945. The manufacture of
Thom, C., and W. W. Fisk. 1918. History and development of the Cheddar cheese from pasteurized milk. J. Dairy Sci. 28:187–200.
cheese industry in America. Pages 311–326 in The Book of Cheese. Wisconsin Milk Marketing Board. 2017. Dairy Data. A review of the
L. H. Bailey, ed. McMillan, New York, NY. Wisconsin dairy industry. Accessed Mar. 20, 2017. http://www
Upreti, P., P. Bühlmann, and L. E. Metzger. 2006. Influence of calcium .wmmb.com/assets/images/pdf/WisconsinDairyData.pdf.
and phosphorus, lactose, and salt-to-moisture ratio on Cheddar Wong, A. C. L. 1998. Biofilms in food processing environments. J.
cheese quality: pH buffering properties of cheese. J. Dairy Sci. Dairy Sci. 81:2765–2770.
89:938–950. Yun, J. J., D. M. Barbano, L. J. Kielly, and P. S. Kindstedt. 1995.
Webb, B. R., and E. O. Whittier. 1948. The utilization of whey: A Mozzarella cheese: Impact of rod:coccus ratio on composition, pro-
review. J. Dairy Sci. 31:139–164. teolysis, and functional properties. J. Dairy Sci. 78:751–760.
APPENDIX
Table A1. Selected milestones in cheese production and quality
Year Milestone Reference
1851 First cheese factory in United States. Thom and Fisk, 1918
1890 Babcock fat test introduced. Babcock, 1890
1890s Commercial production of starter cultures begins. Johnson, 2014
1902 Cold-curing of cheese introduced, with consolidated cold curing station to service Babcock and Russell, 1902
several factories.
1943 Pasteurization of milk for cheese making becomes mandatory in some states. Price, 1956
1940s Adjunct bacteria are added to enhance cheese flavor development. Harris and Hammer, 1940
1943 Mechanized cooling of can milk. Hlynka et al., 1943
1950 Establishment of definitions for several varieties of cheese by the Food and Drug Price, 1956
Administration.
1960s Mechanized cutting vats are developed. Olson, 1970
1964 Direct acidification of milk for cheese making of certain varieties. Breene et al., 1964
1974 Membrane filtration of milk is used for cheese making. Kosikowski, 1974
1976 Plasmid DNA is found to encode for lactose fermentation. McKay et al., 1976
1980s Fermentation produces chymosin. Johnson and Lucey, 2006
1986 Resistance to bacteriophage found to be encoded by plasmid DNA. Sanders et al., 1986

Cheese

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cheese

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cheese

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

J. Dairy Sci.

A 100-Year Review: Cheese production and quality1

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION: THE CHANGING SCENE

Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 100 No. 12, 2017

Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 100 No. 12, 2017

Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 100 No. 12, 2017

Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 100 No. 12, 2017

Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 100 No. 12, 2017

Table A1. Selected milestones in cheese production and quality

Year Milestone Reference

1890 Babcock fat test introduced. Babcock, 1890

1890s Commercial production of starter cultures begins. Johnson, 2014

1943 Mechanized cooling of can milk. Hlynka et al., 1943

1960s Mechanized cutting vats are developed. Olson, 1970

1980s Fermentation produces chymosin. Johnson and Lucey, 2006

Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 100 No. 12, 2017

You might also like