Compositional and Functional Properties of Buttermilk: A Comparison Between Sweet, Sour, and Whey Buttermilk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Buttermilk is a dairy ingredient widely used in the food industry because of its emulsifying capacity and its positive impact on flavor. Commercial buttermilk is sweet buttermilk, a by-product from churning sweet cream into butter. However, other sources of buttermilk exist, including cultured and whey buttermilk obtained from churning of cultured cream and whey cream, respectively. The compositional and functional properties (protein solubility, viscosity, emulsifying and foaming properties) of sweet, sour, and whey buttermilk were determined at different pH levels and compared with those of skim milk and whey. Composition of sweet and cultured buttermilk was similar to skim milk, and composition of whey buttermilk was similar to whey, with the exception of fat content, which was higher in buttermilk than in skim milk or whey (6 to 20% vs. 0.3 to 0.4%). Functional properties of whey buttermilk were independent of pH, whereas sweet and cultured buttermilk exhibited lower protein solubility and emulsifying properties as well as a higher viscosity at low pH (pH <or= 5). Sweet, sour, and whey buttermilks showed higher emulsifying properties and lower foaming capacity than milk and whey because of the presence of milk fat globule membrane components. Furthermore, among the various buttermilks, whey buttermilk was the one showing the highest emulsifying properties and the lowest foaming capacity. This could be due to a higher ratio of phospholipids to protein in whey buttermilk compared with cultured or sweet buttermilk. Whey buttermilk appears to be a promising and unique ingredient in the formulation of low pH foods.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".