|
|
 
|
    
|
“Value Addition To Buffalo Milk”
Present Scenario And Future Prospects
Dr. S. K. Kanawjia Principal Scientist
Dairy Technology Division,
National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal-132 001 (Haryana)
|
|
|
Introduction
Buffalo has been an integral part of livestock agriculture in Asia for over 5000 years producing milk, meat, hides and draft power. Milk accounts for about 70 per cent of the DGP from livestock sector. India accounted for 14.4per cent of estimated 626 million tones of the milk produced in the world in 2005. Milk production in India increased more than five-fold from 17 million tones in 1950-51 to 90.17 million tones in 2004-05 (94.6 million tones in 2005-06 provisional estimates). Buffalo is the major contributor of 55.42 per cent to India’s milk production and about 65.84 percent of total buffalo milk produced in the world. Milk is a part of daily food consumption in most south Asian countries, especially for a population predominantly vegetarians in India. Export earning of dairy products in 2005-06 was Rs. 6766.82 million as against Rs. 13.98 million in 1990-91. The imports increased from Rs. 40.52 million to 345.66 million during the same period and hence net trade balance changed from negative to positive. The present paper aims at highlighting the present scenario and future prospects of processing of buffalo milk for value added products.
|
|
|
|
Buffalo Milk Quality
Comparative milk composition in buffalo, cow and goat is given in Table 1. Buffalo milk is healthy as it is richer in saturated fatty acids. Its much higher total solids (18-23% vs 13-16%) is useful for making cheese, butter fat, several kinds of traditional sweets
|
|
|
and ice cream. Swamp buffalo milk has even higher fat (9-15%), protein (7.1%), lactose (4.90%) and ash (0.89%) (Thac 1979). Buffalo milk is especially important and priced higher in Italy for making Mozzarella cheese.
|
|
|
|
Table 1: Composition of milk in buffalo, cow and goat |
|
|
|
|
Constituents |
Buffalo |
|
Moisture (gm) |
81.00 |
|
Protein (gm) |
4.30 |
|
Fat (gm) |
6.50 |
|
Minerals (gm) |
0.80 |
|
Carbohydrates (gm) |
5.00 |
|
Energy calories (kCal) |
117.00 |
|
Calcium (mg) |
210.00 |
|
Phosphorus (mg) |
130.00 |
|
Iron (mg) |
0.20 |
Nutritional Value of Buffalo Milk Products
Various studies have established that there is practically no difference in the nutritive value and digestibility of milk and milk products obtained from cow and buffalo milk. Significantly, cholesterol content of buffalo milk is 0.65 mg/g compared to cow milk, which contains 3.14 mg/g. Animal bioassays have shown the PER value of buffalo milk proteins as 2.74 and that of cow milk as 2.49. Corresponding values for the biological value, NPU and absorption of fat as 91.9, 88.8, and 79.9 and 78.4, 78.3 and 74.6, respectively.
Bioprotective Attributes of Buffalo Milk
It has been perceived that the communities with superior health/immunity traditionally use buffalo milk. Supportive research on nutritional and immunological
|
|
|
|
Cow |
Goat |
Skimmed Milk |
|
87.50 |
86.80 |
92.10 |
|
3.20 |
3.30 |
2.50 |
|
4.10 |
4.50 |
0.10 |
|
0.80 |
0.80 |
0.70 |
|
4.40 |
4.60 |
4.60 |
|
67.00 |
72.00 |
29.00 |
|
120.00 |
170.00 |
120.00 |
|
90.00 |
120.00 |
90.00 |
|
0.20 |
0.30 |
0.20 |
aspects of buffalo milk adequately substantiates such perceptions. Level of various bioprotective factors, such as immunoglobulin, lysozyme, lactoferrin, lactoperoxidase etc. is appreciably higher in buffalo milk compared to that of cow milk. Various research investigations suggest the possibility of utilizing bovine cholesterol immunoglobulin for industrial production of infant formulas with enhanced bioprotective factors. Considerable scope is indicated for developing a range of dairy foods from buffalo milk having enhanced nutritional and Probiotical attributes. In concert with other bioprotective factors, immunoglobulin of protection primarily by binding and neutralizing toxins of viruses, and preventing contact between entero pathogenic microorganisms and epithelial cells, thus hindering infections. These findings are summarized in the accompanying Table-2. |
|
|
71
Dairy Year Book 2008 |
|