European Food Research and Technology

, Volume 240, Issue 6, pp 1247–1257 | Cite as

Storage-induced changes in the sensory characteristics and volatiles of conventional and lactose-hydrolyzed UHT processed milk

  • Sidsel Jensen
  • Therese Jansson
  • Nina Eggers
  • Morten R. Clausen
  • Lotte B. Larsen
  • Hanne B. Jensen
  • Colin Ray
  • Anja Sundgren
  • Henrik J. Andersen
  • Hanne Christine Bertram
Original Paper


Storage-induced changes are known to be more prominent in lactose-hydrolyzed (LH) milk compared to conventional milk. Therefore the present study aimed at identifying off-flavors resembling from formation of volatiles during storage of ultra-high temperature treated (UHT) LH milk and conventional UHT milk. Further, the influence of heat processing, indirect or direct, on UHT LH milk was also examined. Storage-induced changes in sensory attributes, volatiles and primary amines were investigated during a 4 months period. Conventional UHT milk (with 5 % lactose) processed using indirect heat treatment (CONVI) and two types of UHT LH milk (with less than 0.01 % lactose) produced using either direct heat treatment (LHD) or indirect heat treatment (LHI) were represented in the study. Sensory descriptive analysis showed that fresh samples of CONVI, LHI and LHD differed in sensory properties and the samples could be differentiated according to boiled and stale aroma as well as color saturation. Differentiation of the fresh samples based on the volatile gas chromatography–mass spectrometry profile was not achievable. During storage, samples developed differently with respect to sensory characteristics, volatiles and the amount of primary amines. Partial least squares models (PLS1) including only methyl ketones and aldehydes showed that 2-butanone, 2-pentanone, 2-heptanone, 2-nonanone, heptanal, octanal and nonanal predicted stale flavor. Bitter taste, on the other hand, correlated with the amount of primary amines (Pearson’s correlation, r 2 = 0.71). This finding indicates that storage-induced changes in sensory characteristics, volatiles and primary amines depend on both differences in lactose content and the applied heat processing.


Bitter taste Lactose-free milk UHT Sensory descriptive analysis GC–MS Stale flavor 



The present study is part of the Ph.D. work of Therese Jansson and was financially supported by Arla Foods amba, Future Food Innovation (FFI), Danish Dairy Research Foundation, and Aarhus University.

Conflict of interest

Anja Sundgren, Henrik J. Andersen and Colin Ray were all employed by Arlafoods amba at the time of the study. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Compliance with Ethics Requirements

Informed consent was obtained from participants in the sensory panelist for being included in the study.


  1. 1.
    Itan Y, Jones BL, Ingram CJE et al (2010) A worldwide correlation of lactase persistence phenotype and genotypes. BMC Evol Biol 10:36. doi: 10.1186/1471-2148-10-36 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Almon R, Engfeldt P, Tysk C et al (2007) Prevalence and trends in adult-type hypolactasia in different age cohorts in Central Sweden diagnosed by genotyping for the adult-type hypolactasia-linked LCT -13910C > T mutation. Scand J Gastroenterol 42:165–170. doi: 10.1080/00365520600825257 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Astley M (2012) Self diagnosed lactose intolerance driving lactose free dairy sales—analyst. In:
  4. 4.
    Zenith International Ltd (2012) Opportunity for lactose free dairy report. 115Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Messia MC, Candigliota T, Marconi E (2007) Assessment of quality and technological characterization of lactose-hydrolyzed milk. Food Chem 104:910–917. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2006.12.045 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lawless H (1995) Dimensions of sensory quality: a critique. Food Qual Prefer 6:191–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vallejo-Cordoba B, Nakai S (1994) Keeping-quality assessment of pasteurized milk by multivariate analysis of dynamic headspace gas chromatographic data. 2. Flavor classification by linear discriminant analysis. J Agric Food Chem 42:994–999. doi: 10.1021/jf00040a030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Datta N, Elliott AJ, Perkins ML, Deeth HC (2002) Ultra-high-temperature (UHT) treatment of milk: comparison of direct and indirect modes of heating. Aust J Dairy Technol 57:211–227Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elliott AJ, Dhakal A, Datta N, Deeth HC (2003) Heat-induced changes in UHT milks. Aust J Dairy Technol 58:3–10Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elliott AJ, Datta N, Amenu B, Deeth HC (2005) Heat-induced and other chemical changes in commercial UHT milks. J Dairy Res 72:442–446. doi: 10.1017/S002202990500138X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jokar A, Karbassi A (2011) In-house production of lactose-hydrolysed milk by beta-galactosidase from Lactobacillus bulgaricus. J Agric Sci Technol 13:577–584Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lorenzen PC, Clawin-Rädecker I, Einhoff K et al (2011) A survey of the quality of extended shelf life (ESL) milk in relation to HTST and UHT milk. Int J Dairy Technol 64:166–178. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0307.2010.00656.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ochi H, Sumi M, Nakata I et al (2010) Sensometric calibration of sensory characteristics of commercially available milk products with instrumental data. J Dairy Sci 93:1794–1806. doi: 10.3168/jds.2009-2575 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tossavainen O (2008) Heat-induced changes in lactose hydrolysed milks. Helsinki University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Adhikari K, Dooley LM, Chambers E, Bhumiratana N (2010) Sensory characteristics of commercial lactose-free milks manufactured in the United States. LWT Food Sci Technol 43:113–118. doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2009.06.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Singh RRB, Ruhil AP, Jain DK et al (2009) Prediction of sensory quality of UHT milk—a comparison of kinetic and neural network approaches. J Food Eng 92:146–151. doi: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2008.10.032 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Valero E, Villamiel M, Miralles B et al (2001) Changes in flavour and volatile components during storage of whole and skimmed UHT milk. Food Chem 72:51–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kato Y, Matsuda T, Kato N, Nakamura R (1988) Browning and protein polymerization induced by amino-carbonyl reaction of ovalbumin with glucose and lactose. J Agric Food Chem 36:806–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pellegrino L, De Noni I, Resmini P (1995) Coupling of lactulose and furosine indices for quality evaluation of sterilized milk. Int Dairy J 5:647–659. doi: 10.1016/0958-6946(95)00036-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jansson T, Clausen MR, Sundekilde UK et al (2014) Lactose-hydrolyzed milk is more prone to chemical changes during storage than conventional ultra-high-temperature (UHT) milk. J Agric Food Chem 62:7886–7896. doi: 10.1021/jf501671z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jeon IJ, Thomas EL, Reineccius GA (1978) Production of volatile flavor compounds in ultrahigh-temperature processed milk during aseptic storage. J Agric Food Chem 26:1183–1188. doi: 10.1021/jf60219a039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rerkrai S, Jeon IJ, Bassette R (1987) Effect of various direct ultra-high temperature heat treatments on flavor of commercially prepared milks. J Dairy Sci 70:2046–2054. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(87)80252-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Perkins M, Elliott A (2005) Stale flavour volatiles in Australian commercial UHT milk during storage. Aust J dairy Sci Technol 60:231–237Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    McKellar RC, Froehlich DA, Butler G et al (1984) The effect of uncooled storage on proteolysis bitterness and apparent viscosity in ultra high temperature milk.pdf. Can Inst Food Sci Technol J 17:14–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bylund G (2003) Dairy processing handbook, 2nd ed. Tetra Pak Processing Systems, Malmö, Sweden, pp 227–246Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jensen S, Oestdal H, Skibsted LH et al (2011) Chemical changes in wheat pan bread during storage and how it affects the sensory perception of aroma, flavour, and taste. J Cereal Sci 53:259–268. doi: 10.1016/j.jcs.2010.11.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    ASTM (1986) Physical requirements guidelines for sensory evaluation laboratoriesGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    ISO (1993) ISO 8586-1. General guidelines for the selection, training and monitoring of assessorsGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jansson T, Jensen S, Eggers N et al (2014) Volatile component profiles of conventional and lactose-hydrolyzed UHT milk—a dynamic headspace gas chromatography-mass spectrometry study. Dairy Sci Technol 94:311–325. doi: 10.1007/s13594-014-0164-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Dolan BJW (2009) Calibration curves, part 2: what are the limits? LCGC N Am 27:306–312Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dalsgaard TK, Nielsen JH, Larsen LB (2007) Proteolysis of milk proteins lactosylated in model systems. Mol Nutr Food Res 51:404–414. doi: 10.1002/mnfr.200600112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kuznetsova A, Brockhoff PB, Christensen RHB (2015) Tests in linear mixed effects models (Package “lmerTest”). R package version 2.0-20, pp 1–15.
  33. 33.
    De Wit R, Nieuwenhuijse H (2008) Kinetic modelling of the formation of sulphur-containing flavour components during heat-treatment of milk. Int Dairy J 18:539–547. doi: 10.1016/j.idairyj.2007.11.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Burton H (1955) Color changes in heated and unheated milk II. The whitening of milk on heating. J Dairy Res 22:74–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Brauss MS, Linforth RST, Cayeux I et al (1999) Altering the fat content affects flavor release in a model yogurt system. J Agric Food Chem 47:2055–2059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kühn J, Considine T, Singh H (2006) Interactions of milk proteins and volatile flavor compounds: implications in the development of protein foods. J Food Sci 71:R72–R82. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-3841.2006.00051.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Parat-Wilhelms M, Denker M, Borcherding K et al (2005) Influence of defined milk products on the flavour of white coffee beverages using static headspace gas chromatography–mass spectrometry/olfactometry and sensory analysis. Eur Food Res Technol 221:265–273. doi: 10.1007/s00217-005-1152-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gebhardt R, Steinhauer T, Meyer P et al (2012) Structural changes of deposited casein micelles induced by membrane filtration. Faraday Discuss 158:77. doi: 10.1039/c2fd20022h CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Steinhauer T, Kulozik U, Gebhardt R (2014) Structure of milk protein deposits formed by casein micelles and β-lactoglobulin during frontal microfiltration. J Memb Sci 468:126–132. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2014.05.027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Quiñones HJ, Barbano DM, Philips LG (1998) Influence of protein standardization by ultrafiltration on the viscosity, color, and sensory properties of 2 and 3.3% milks. J Dairy Sci 81:884–894. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(98)75647-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Quiñones HJ, Barbano DM, Phillips LG (1997) Influence of protein standardization by ultrafiltration on the viscosity, color, and sensory properties of skim and 1% milk. J Dairy Sci 80:3142–3151. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(97)76285-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Chávez-Servín JL, Romeu-Nadal M, Castellote AI, López-Sabater C (2006) Evolution of free mono and disaccharide content of milk based formula powder during storage. Food Chem 97:103–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Van Boekel MAJS (1998) Effect of heating on Maillard reactions in milk. Food Chem 62:403–414. doi: 10.1016/S0308-8146(98)00075-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Contarini G, Povolo M, Leardi R et al (1997) Influence of heat treatment on the volatile compounds of milk. J Agric Food Chem 45:3171–3177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Vazquez-Landaverde PA, Velazquez G, Torres JA, Qian MC (2005) Quantitative determination of thermally derived off-flavor compounds in milk using solid-phase microextraction and gas chromatography. J Dairy Sci 88:3764–3772. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(05)73062-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zabbia A, Buys EM, De Kock HL (2012) Undesirable sulphur and carbonyl flavor compounds in UHT milk: a review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 52:21–30. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2010.487166 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ballance PE (1961) Production of volatile compounds related to the flavour of foods from the Strecker degradation of dl-methionine. J Sci Food Agric 12:532–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Thomas E, Burton H, Ford JE, Perkin AG (1975) The effect of oxygen content on flavour and chemical changes during aseptic storage of whole milk after ultra-high-temperature processing. J Dairy Res 42:285–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Siefarth C, Serfert Y, Drusch S, Buettner A (2014) Comparative evaluation of diagnostic tools for oxidative deterioration of polyunsaturated fatty acid-enriched infant formulas during storage. Foods 3:30–65. doi: 10.3390/foods3010030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sidsel Jensen
    • 1
  • Therese Jansson
    • 1
  • Nina Eggers
    • 1
  • Morten R. Clausen
    • 1
  • Lotte B. Larsen
    • 2
  • Hanne B. Jensen
    • 2
    • 3
  • Colin Ray
    • 4
  • Anja Sundgren
    • 4
    • 5
  • Henrik J. Andersen
    • 3
  • Hanne Christine Bertram
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Food Science, Research Center AarslevAarhus UniversityAarslevDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Food Science, Research Center FoulumAarhus UniversityTjeleDenmark
  3. 3.Arla Foods IngredientsViby JDenmark
  4. 4.Arla Foods Strategic Innovation CentreStockholmSweden
  5. 5.O.Kavli ABÄlvsjöSweden

Personalised recommendations