Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Reconnoitering Milk Constituents of Different Species, Probing and Soliciting Factors to Its Soundness

Written By

Amjad Aqib, Muhammad Ijaz, Aftab Anjum, Muhammad Kulyar, Muhammad Shoaib and Shahid Farooqi

Submitted: 30 September 2018 Reviewed: 03 December 2018 Published: 01 March 2019

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.82852

From the Edited Volume

Milk Production, Processing and Marketing

Edited by Khalid Javed

Chapter metrics overview

1,274 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics


Milk composition and production varies from species to species, reflecting its diversified benefits on health. Lipids from caprine and ovine milk are anti-obesity and anti-atherogenic while prebiotic in the case of caprine. Higher contents of selenium from caprine and iron from camel milk play a role in immune system and oxygen transport system, respectively, whereas enriched vitamins like riboflavin, folic acid, B6, vitamin A of bovine, and foliate of cattle are effective in the synthesis of hemoglobin, and high niacin content of caprine is anti-cancerous. Camel milk is found to have characteristics of anti-carcinogenic, antidiabetic, and autoimmune therapeutic. Various processing techniques like pasteurization, skim milk powder processing, and ultra-high temperature processing are necessary for safe provision of milk to meet consumers’ demand. Change in flavor, loss of micronutrients, biofilm production, and spore-forming bacteria are prominent challenges during processing. Antimicrobial resistance and disease conditions are exaggerating factors of milk deterioration with respect to quality and quantity. Preclinical trials like somatic cell count, California mastitis test, proteomic analysis, Raman spectroscopy-based analysis, and X-ray fluorescence analysis are helpful in avoiding the spread of disease and controlling of economic losses. This chapter focuses differential functions of bioactive of milk, issues arising during processing techniques, and preclinical studies of milk for safer production and consumption of milk.


  • milk composition
  • bovine
  • camel
  • caprine
  • ovine
  • mare
  • differential functions
  • processing techniques
  • preclinical milk tests

1. Introduction

Milk, according to USDA, is a sterile lacteal secretion from mammary glands by full milking of one or more animals and considered free of colostrum. Basically, milk is composed of significant components that may be categorized into macro and micro milk components. The former category is comprised of protein, lipids, and oligosaccharides mainly lactose, whereas the latter contains minerals and vitamins [1]. Utilization of milk from various species of animals depends upon likelihood of people and access to the dairy animals. In such situations, some of dairy animals are overlooked due to their limited population in specific regions of the world. Camel and caprine milk is specifically medicinal in nature that is limitedly utilized as staple use. The production systems are fewer than needed which is a grave situation. It is a dire need to explore bioactive components of milk from various animals and to investigate alternative resources to feed the hungry and to be benefited by pharmacological aspects.

The likelihood of food consumption stresses it to be natural, free from chemical preservatives, and microbiologically safe with extended shelf life [2]. The rapid development of our society in the past few decades and the careless use of large amount of agricultural services are appearing to be a burden over human health. The hunger of the increasing population cannot be satisfied with fresh milk due to unequal production and utilization system. Previous 15 years have noticed dairy industry emerging as technology revolution in product processing [3]. But there are several harms to the soundness of milk associated with processing techniques in terms of quality and quantity losses. The current chapter encompasses bioactive components of milk from different milk-producing animals and their chances of being deteriorated by processing techniques.


2. Dairy milk bioactive components and their role on health and diseases

2.1 Bovine milk

Bovine milk as whole milk and its products are serving an easy way of achieving good nutrition. Bovine milk contains the nutrients needed for growth and development of the calf and is a resource of lipids, proteins, amino acids, vitamins, and minerals. The milk is also blessed with many substances like hormones, growth factors, immunoglobulins, peptides, cytokines, polyamines, bioactive peptides, and many enzymes that play different roles in our body [4]. Milk composition has dynamic properties and its composition varies depending on lactation, diet, age, breed, energy balance, and udder health. Colostrum is very different from milk, but the most important difference is the concentration of milk protein. It will be twice in colostrum compared with milk in late lactation. Lipids in bovine milk are suspended or emulsified in the form of fat globules covered with membranes. Lipids are mainly composed of different types of fatty acids having different fraction. Milk contains about 32 g of protein per liter. Milk protein is a good source of essential amino acids. In addition, milk contains various biologically active proteins, ranging from antimicrobial drugs and ending with nutritionally enriched proteins, as well as growth factors, hormones, enzymes, antibodies, and immune-stimulants. Nitrogen in milk is distributed in casein, serum, and nonprotein nitrogen. The content of casein in milk is about 80% of milk protein. Whey protein is a globular protein that is more soluble in water than casein. The main components are β-lacto globulin, α-lactalbumin, bovine serum albumin, and immunoglobulin. Milk also contains many minerals, vitamins, and antioxidants. Antioxidants prevent the oxidation of milk and also provide protection to cells which involve in milk production and to udder also. The most important antioxidants in milk are mineral selenium and vitamins E and A [5]. However, cow milk (CM) differs from buffalo milk (BM) composition of different milk bioactive components. Buffalo milk has lower cholesterol but more calories and fat compared with cow’s milk. Cow milk has higher cholesterol level than BM, but higher fat contents are present in BM with higher calorie percentage. Buffalo milk has a higher content of fat, lactose, casein, whey proteins, and minerals than cow milk. All of the casein in buffalo milk is present in the micellar form, while in the CM, only 90–95% of the casein is in the micellar state and the rest is present in serum phase. The calcium content is higher in BM than in milk from cow, and it contains more colloidal calcium and phosphorus. The BM is richer in fat than milk from cattle, and absence of b-carotene in BM, which is present in CM, is another notable characteristic [6].

2.2 Camel milk

Camel is a blessing from God as narrated in Muslim’s Holy Quran [7]. The total population of camels in the world accounts 23.9 million. Among the countries, India has 1.9% population of camels over the total world camel population [8]. They are playing a crucial part in the lifestyle of numerous communities, especially those living in arid regions of the Middle East and the Arabian region since many centuries [9]. Total CM production is 1.3 × 106 tons [10], and the annual trade volume in the world is $ 10 billion which is expected to be increased in the near future [11]. Among various types of camels such as Bactrian camel (two humped), dromedary camel (single humped), wild Bactrian (true camels), plus llama, alpaca, guanaco, and vicuna camels [12], the dromedary camel is a resident of desert and dry land environment and accounts 94% of the total world population [13]. Camel milk being a good source of fats occupies opaque white color having salty taste due to high vitamin C content and good odor [14]. The overall constituents of camel milk account 3.4% protein, 3.5% fat, 4.4% lactose, 0.79% ash, and 87% water [15]. Mineral contents are important enriching constituents of milk which in the case of camel accounts for 0.60–1.0% [16] vis-a-vis Ca, P, Mg, Fe, Na, Zn, K, and Cu [17]. Many vitamins like A, C, D, E, and B groups are present in dromedary species of camel. High amount of vitamin C, fatty acids, and fructose and lack of beta-lactoglobulin are the most significant health promoting properties [18].

2.3 Caprine milk

Goats were first domesticated by ancient peoples in the Middle East 10,000 years ago [19]. Goat farming has been increased from 751.63 million (year 2000) to 1006.79 million (year 2016) and is being ranked third after cattle and sheep in total population of animals in all over the world according to FAO [20]. However according to the Economic Survey of Pakistan, goat population has been also increased from 70.3 to 72.2 million in Pakistan [21]. The salient differential bioactive components account for total solids (13.20%), fat content (4.50%), oligosaccharides especially lactose (4.3%), protein contents (3.60%), minerals (0.80%), and vitamins [22].

2.4 Equine milk

Horses can live in many different environments and develop in different ways. The first ancestor of Hyracotherium lived about 60 million years ago. They have four toes on the front paw and three toes on their hind legs [23]. Currently, there are hundreds of breeds of equine present all over the world. However, dairy breeds are predominately found in Mongolia and USSR. Among the dairy breeds, Haflinger horses are the most important milk breed of adults weighing 500 kg, known for their milk production capacities in European countries. [24]. The lactation of mare starts almost 7 days after birth and lasts almost up to 5–8 months of foal age [25]. Due to small mammary gland, mare requires multiple milking (5–7/day) with 2–3 hour intervals [26]. However, the gross milk composition of different breeds varies with an average of fat (1.25%), protein (2.15%), lactose (6.40%), and small amount of minerals 0.4% [25].

2.5 Sheep milk

Unlike caprine and bovine milk, sheep milk is rich in total solids and major milk contents that supply energy. Ovine milk is highly enriched in bioactive components such as lipids, proteins, oligosaccharides, minerals, and vitamin contents (Table 1) [27].

Bioactive name Species name General characters/functions General composition Differential composition (%) Differential functions
Lipids Buffalo Anti-cancer, antiviral, antibacterial, anti-plaque, anticaries, anti-inflammatory, anti-atherogenic, antihypertensive, prevent CHD [32, 35] Triglycerides 98% (SFA, USFA, SCFA, MCFA, LCFA), CLA [5]
Fat globule membrane 1–2% (diglycerides, monogly-cerides, phospholipids, sterols, FFA), peptides [5]
Fat (8.30%) [28]
>50% SFA
Increases HDL and cholesterol level due to high SFA
Cow Fat (4.88%) [28]
CLA (15 mg/100 mL) [33]
FG > 5 μm [33]
Caprine Fat (3.84%) [28]
High MCFA, SCFA, and CLA (35 mg/100 mL) [22] FG < 5 μm [33]
Reduce cholesterol and LDL, rapidly digested, anti-obesity, treatment of malabsorption patients [22]
Ovine 7.1% [43] Anti-atherogenic, decrease LDL cholesterol [39]
High caproic, caprylic, and capric acids [37] and low butyric acid [38], high oleic acid [39]
FG < 3 μm [34]
Camel 3.5% [36]
Mare Low triglycerides (80%)
High phospholipids (5%) and FFA (9%) [25]
1.25% [25]
FG = 2–3 μm [25]
High level of MCFA, higher contents of LA and ALA [25]
Proteins Buffalo Iron carrier, lactose synthesis, retinol binding activity, immunomodulator, anticarcinogenic, antioxidant, antimicrobial, anti- inflammatory Caseins 80% (αs-1, αs-2, β,k)
Whey proteins 20% (α-La, β-Lg, Ig, LF, Lyz, growth factors) [40]
4.48% [28]
Cow 3.49% [28]
Caprine 3.42%
Low αs1 casein, high lactoferrin [33]
Low αs1 casein helps easily tolerated by Childs, treatment of CMA, increased iron absorption [33]
Ovine Antihypertensive, antitumor, ACE inhibitory activity [41, 42] 5.7% [43]
Camel 3.4% [15, 18]
High whey proteins (high Ig, lactoferrin, lysozyme), no β-Lg, high PGRP [15, 18]
Anti-cancerous activity especially breast cancer, antidiabetic, treatment of autoimmune diseases [15, 18]
Mare Caseins 50% (αs1, αs2, β, k), whey proteins 39% (less β-Lg, more α-La & Ig) [25] 2.15% [25]
High β-casein (50%), low kappa casein, αs1 and αs2 (40%), also high gamma casein (10%) [29]
High lactoferrin (>10 times) [30]
Rich source of essential
AA and source of nutrition, easily digestible due to high whey proteins
Carbohydrates Buffalo Probiotic, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, Help in calcium Lactose (lactulose, lactitol, lactobionic acid, galacto) Lactose (4.86%) [28]
Cow 4.47% [28]
Caprine Transport and absorption, beneficial bacteria growth promoter, source of fiber, treat constipation [31] Oligosa-ccharides (galactose, glucose, NANA) [44] Lactose (4.11%) [28]
High amount of oligosaccharides (>10 times than cow)
Ovine 4.6% [43]
Camel 4.4% [15, 18]
High lactose
Mare 6.40% [25]
Minerals Buffalo Strengthening bones, avoid osteoporosis, antioxidant, antihypertensive, DNA synthesis and repair, anti-cancerous, immunomodulatory, avoid High Ca, P, K, and Na and trace Mg, Zn, Fe, Cu, and Se [45, 46] 0.81% [28]
Cow 0.76% [28]
Caprine 0.89% [28]
High selenium [45, 46]
Component of complement system, formation of interleukins by T cells [45, 46]
Ovine 0.9% [43]
Camel asthma, maintain fluid integrity [45, 46] 0.79% [15, 18]
High chloride, low citrate, high Zn, Cu, Fe, and Mn [47]
High iron helps in oxygen transport, component of ETC [47]
Mare 0.4% [25]
Vitamins Buffalo Source of nutrition, antioxidant, anti-cancerous, anti-inflammatory, protect from osteoporosis, atherosclerosis [47, 48] Fat soluble (A, D, E, K), water soluble (B complex) [47, 48] High riboflavin, folic acid, B6, vitamin A Immunity enhancer, treatment of CHD, prevention of megaloblastic anemia, role in morphogenesis [45, 46]
Cow High folate and vitamin B12 [45, 46] Help in synthesis of hemoglobin [45, 46]
Caprine High niacin, vitamin B3, vitamin A [49] Anti-cancerous activity [49]
Camel High vitamin C and niacin, low vitamin A, low vitamin E [47, 48] Antidiabetic, antioxidant, wound healing [47, 48]
Mare High vitamins A, D3, and K3 [25]

Table 1.

General and differential compositional-cum-functional physiology of bioactive components of milk from different animals.

SFA = saturated fatty acids; USFA = unsaturated fatty acids; SCFA = short-chain fatty acids; MCFA = medium-chain fatty acids; LCFA = long-chain fatty acids; FFA = free fatty acids; HDL = high-density lipids; LDL = low-density lipids; FG = fat globule; α-La = alpha lactalbumin; β-Lg = β-lactoglobulin; Ig = immunoglobulin; LF = lactoferrin; Lyz = lysozyme; A.A = amino acid; LA = linoleic acid; ALA = alpha linolenic acid; CLA = conjugated linoleic acid; ETC = electron transport chain; CMA = cow milk allergy; ACE = angiotensin-converting enzyme; CHD = congenital heart defect; PGRP = peptidoglycan recognition proteins; NANA = N-acetylneuraminic acid.


3. Milk processing techniques and their harms to milk

Rapid development of our society in the past few decades and careless use of large amount of agricultural services are appearing to be a burden over human health [3]. The hunger of the increasing population cannot be satisfied with fresh milk due to unequal production and utilization system. In the past 15 years, the dairy industry has evolved with newer techniques of production, products, and processing [3]. But there are several harms to the soundness of milk associated with processing techniques in terms of quality and quantity losses.

3.1 Pasteurization

Diseases associated with the consumption of milk are common due to microbial contamination. To keep milk safe from such microbial contaminants, primarily large-scale techniques (like pasteurization) are adopted to every milk production system. For this purpose, collected milk from dairy farms is sent to a reservoir of processing units for processing, where a large amount of milk is stored [50]. Transportation of milk in such a way may cause a source of spreading viruses and bacteria. That milk is usually pasteurized and assuming that heat treatment has demolished appropriately [51]. However, some bacteria remain intact due to microbial biofilm within the distribution line and unhygienic behavior of employees [52]. While repeated or prolonged heat treatment causes protein denaturation and binding of denatured whey protein with casein micelles leads to migration of soluble calcium and phosphate to the colloidal stage and mollify of the enzymes. Research shows that the available amount of lysine, iodine, folate, and vitamins B12, C, B6, and B1 in milk decreases after pasteurization [53]. Heat treatment reduces α-la (α-lactalbumin) and PGRP (peptidoglycan recognition protein) in the case of camel milk [54]. Extreme pH, removal of bound Ca2+, addition of denaturant agents, or cleavage of disulfide bridges can denature α-lactalbumin in several ways [55]. Among vitamins, vitamin C is the most important that can be quickly destroyed when milk is heated [56].

Treatment at elevated temperatures reduces the quality of milk supply, as many nutrients are thermally unstable [2]. The second most parameter is aroma of dairy products, which critically affects consumer acceptance, shelf life, and other attributes. When thermal treatment is employed to reduce or destroy the microbial load and enzyme activity to ensure safety and to increase shelf life, the aroma of the milk changes and differs from that of raw milk [57]. Ultra-pasteurization (UP) and ultra-high temperature (UHT), high temperature/short time (HTST), DSI-UP, or IND-UP are widely used thermal treatments for extended shelf life of milk. These processing techniques affect color due to various reactions during thermal processing or storage. These key changes in flavor during thermal processing of milk are associated with Maillard reactions [58].

3.2 Ultra-high temperature (UHT)

The contents of flavored milk are sweeteners such as natural sugar, sucrose, fructose, glucose syrup, or a sweetener without calories depending upon the manufacturer and the consumer demand [59]. As a result of heat treatment, the basic constituents like proteins, carbohydrates, and vitamins of flavored milk undergo chemical and biochemical modifications [60]. Some of these modifications include lactulose and acid formation through lactose degradation. It promotes dehydroalanine development by side chains of amino acids through β-elimination. It is a compound that reacts readily with lysine yielding lysinoalanine and the denaturing of whey proteins [61].

3.3 Skim milk

A multistage processing technique (like skim milk development) involves wide use of heat treatment for milk preservation [62]. The formation of Maillard intermediates and glycation products during manufacture of dairy products has been studied [63]; the focus of these studies was the reduction in nutritional values, e.g., lysin [64].

3.3.1 Biofilm resistance of the bacteria in a milk powder processing factory

In the dairy industry, it is known to use a closed production system without removing or opening equipment using the CIP process. In terms of economic benefits, short cleaning procedures and long-term use of equipment in processing lines are common [65]. As a result, bacteria remain on the surface of the device and can accumulate in hard-to-reach places, such as dead ends, cracks, seals, and valves, where the complexity of cleaning and disinfection is difficult [66]. Undesirable biofilms on the surfaces of food processing have certain properties, such as increased tolerance to antimicrobial agents, increased secondary metabolites, etc. These are the potential cause of bacterial contamination [67]. In dairy industry, the presence of such biofilms leads to contamination after processing, shortens the shelf life, and promotes the transmission of diseases [68].

3.3.2 Presence of spore-forming bacteria in skim milk

The existence of spore-forming bacteria in milk is a critically important issue in the dairy industry. Bacterial endospores can survive in harsh environmental conditions such as high heat, low pH, desiccation, or cleaning and sanitizing chemicals [69]. Compared with vegetative cells, spores have also been found to attach more readily to stainless steel, leading to the formation of biofilms that can promote bacterial contamination within dairy processing plants. Spores present in final products can germinate and produce enzymes that decrease the quality and shelf life of dairy product; it causes the significant economic losses [70]. Additionally, some spore formers such as Bacillus cereus and Bacillus subtilis can produce toxins that are responsible for food poisoning [71]. Thermophilic geobacillus spp. and Anoxybacillus spp. are other spore formers of importance to the dairy industry, as they are commonly present in dairy powders and evaporated milk [70].


4. Factors affecting milk production and composition

The milk quality is influenced by many factors acting together and influences each other [72]. One of the most important factors is disease that adversely affects livestock systems that leads to decrease in yield, income, and survival of livelihood. The impact of livestock diseases is complicated and often exceeds the impact on the respective producers [73]. Selection of dairy animals, nutritional management, advances in milking technology, and mammary gland of the dairy animals are the other factors that are also associated with milk yield as well as its composition [74].

4.1 Antimicrobial effects on quality of milk production and processing

Unadulterated high-quality milk that is free of antimicrobial residues is the most appropriate choice to farmers, consumers, and milk processing companies. Such milk enables the farmers to get a fair price [75]. Antibiotics are widely used in livestock production for therapeutics, growth promoters, and prophylactics since many years [76]. Such antimicrobial drugs affect the antibiotic-sensitive bacteria that involves in many fermentation processes. So, the presence of these antimicrobial drugs may affect the dairy products. This results in damage to the sensory properties and coagulation or ripening of the dairy products [77]. If the sale of raw milk is considered “unsuitable for consumption,” due to the presence of antibiotics, transmission of milk may lead to ban by competent authorities. Costs of storage and subsequent disposal are the duties of farmers. So, farmers must incur large economic losses [78].

4.1.1 Assessment of antimicrobial coatings for packaged fresh milk

Packaging is an integrated technology that includes protection, ease of use, and communication. To protect the product, it is important to select and design the appropriate packaging materials [79]. Antimicrobial coatings are increasingly being used as a means of prolonging the shelf life of dairy products. This expansion helps consumers to reduce the amount of household waste milk [80]. The quality of the packaged milk depends on the internal properties of milk (oxidation-reduction potential, respiration rate, water activity, chemical structure, etc.) and the external factors (ambient composition, withholding temperature, relative humidity, etc.) [81]. Use of polymeric coating for maintaining the quality of milk is not possible due to many factors’ involvement like design and development. Moreover, coating contributes to thermal and gas related mechanical properties due to its unique chemical structure [82]. But, due to the high cost of this process, small industries are unable to adopt it [83].

4.1.2 Diseases and disease conditions

Disease has a lot of impact, including a decline in productivity in livestock [84]. High infectious animal diseases, such as foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), hemorrhagic septicemia (HS), mastitis, peste des petits ruminant (PPR), and surra, cause irreparable economic losses for agricultural communities [85]. Ketosis is one of the diseases that causes lower milk production and an increased risk for developing other metabolic and infectious diseases which further affect milk properties [86]. There are many other factors especially environmental which affects production and properties of milk [87]. Mastitis is considered the most frequent health disorder in dairy farms. Decrease in milk components is one of the major origins of these economic losses both for clinical and subclinical infections [88]. These milk components are used as indicators of the metabolic status of cattle. The most relevant parameters of milk explain the balance of energy, protein, mineral, and acid-base balance and their standard concentrations and trends associated with various types of metabolic disorders. A comprehensive result of changes in the composition of milk can be used to identify early health problems. These changes in composition may help in protective cure of diseases [73].


5. Role of preclinical studies in safeguarding milk production and its properties

Dairy products are an important part of the human diet for more than 8000 years and are one of the official dietary recommendations for many countries in the world [89]. Daily intake of milk and dairy products has been identified as an important part of a balanced diet [90], because milk serves as a whole range nutrient consumed by humans (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Gross milk production of different milk-producing species [21].

5.1 Preclinical tests for milk analysis

5.1.1 X-ray fluorescence analysis

Recently, this technology has become widespread. The XRF method makes it possible to carry out analyses without sample separation. It helps in the quantification of minerals, trace elements, and volatiles which are difficult to determine in other analytical methods [92]. X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy (XRF) is an extension of the milk component analysis domain. Various configurations of XRF spectrometers are commercially available and are designed to provide economical and rapid analysis of milk. XRF is an excellent tool for daily analysis of the milk in dairy industries and research institutes. The results of the analysis can be used to assess nutritional value and evaluate the milk and dairy products [93].

5.1.2 Raman spectroscopy-based analysis

In this method, different types of milk quantity samples are used to classify several classes using reduction techniques in combination with random forest classifiers (RF). Quantitative and experimental analyses are based on locally collected milk samples from various species, including cow, buffalo, goat, and human milk samples. This classification is based on changes in the intensity of Raman peaks in a milk sample. The analysis of principal components (PCA) was used as a reduction technology in combination with RF to emphasize changes in Raman spectra that can differentiate milk samples from different species. The proposed method shows a sufficient opportunity to distinguish samples of cow milk from different species due to an average accuracy of about 94%, a specificity of about 97%, and a sensitivity of about 93% [94].

5.1.3 Somatic cell count (SCC) test

Mastitis is mostly caused by bacterial pathogens invading the mammary gland. Typical pathogens, namely, Escherichia coli, a gram-negative bacterium usually associated with acute, clinical mastitis, and Staphylococcus aureus, a gram-positive bacterium often associated with chronic mastitis, can cause differential activation of the immune system [95]. Somatic cell count (SCC) is used as key indicator in mastitis screening programs typically applied in the frame of dairy herd improvement (DHI) testing programs [96]. Direct microscopic somatic cell count (DMSCC) is one of the approved methods by FDA (Foss, Hillerød, Denmark). Flow cytometry and Ekomilk Scan® are also used to check the somatic cell count (Figures 2 and 3) [97].

Figure 2.

General composition of milk from different dairy animals [91].

Figure 3.

Comparison of the somatic cell score (SCS) using different methods.

5.1.4 California mastitis test (CMT)

The technique, invented in 1957 by Schalm and Noorlander, is used to detect intramammary infection caused by a major mastitis pathogen in early lactation cows [98]. They indicated that the degree of precipitation and gel formed by a mixture of the reagent and milk reflected the somatic cell count of the milk (Figure 4) [99].

Figure 4.

Sensitivity and specificity within first week of calving through CMT [100].

5.1.5 Proteomics techniques for mastitis control

Early detection of mastitis and related pathogenic factors improves animal health status through timely and effective treatment. With the development of related technologies of proteomics, such as 2D-gel electrophoresis (2D-GE) and mass spectrometry (MS), several new proteins associated with mastitis have been identified [101]. The evolution of proteomic profiles of pathogens can help to identify the existing information on enzymes, toxins, and metabolites. However, the successful use of these new biomarkers for detection devices remains a challenge [102].


6. Conclusions

Fat is higher in bovine specie as compared to others and it is the main source of HDL and cholesterol enhancement in blood. Protein of ovine is higher than other milk-producing animals. Protein from camel milk (lactoferrin, immunoglobulin, lysozyme) is very useful in diabetes, cancer, and autoimmune diseases. High selenium found in caprine milk fortifies immune system, while higher contents of zinc, iron, and manganese in camel milk speak of greater oxygen carrying capacity by helping ion transport exchange. Higher riboflavin, folic acid, B6, and vitamin A in buffalo milk are blessings to enhance immunity and decrease of megaloblastic anemia. Antidiabetic, antioxidant, high vitamin C and niacin, low vitamin A and E are more defined properties that refer as wound healer agent. Heat treatment protocols result in denaturation of lysine, iodine, folate, and vitamins B12, B6, B1, and C, inactivation of enzymes, and change in flavor. Skim milk production often favors increase in biofilm resistance and spread of presence of spore-forming bacteria. Adding to this are the diseases or disease conditions exacerbating compromised soundness of milk. Preclinical studies are effective approaches to avoid deterioration of milk. X-ray fluorescence analysis is effective in evaluation of nutritive values of milk and milk products without decomposition of milk. Raman spectroscopy-based analysis successfully differentiate between milk of different species with higher sensitivity and specificity. Somatic cell count and California mastitis tests are fruitful in estimation of intramammary infection. Latest techniques like proteomic protocols are explorable approaches as an effective preclinical study of milk.


Conflict of interest

Authors declare no conflict of interest.


  1. 1. Ahmad S, Anjum F, Huma N, Sameen A, Zahoor T. Composition and physico-chemical characteristics of buffalo milk with particular emphasis on lipids, proteins, minerals, enzymes and vitamins. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences. 2013;23(1 Suppl):62-74
  2. 2. Chawla R, Patil GR, Singh AK. High hydrostatic pressure technology in dairy processing: A review. Journal of Food Science and Technology. 2011;48(3):260-268
  3. 3. Bourn D, Prescott J. A comparison of the nutritional value, sensory qualities, and food safety of organically and conventionally produced foods. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. 2002;42(1):1-34
  4. 4. Jensen RG, Blanc B, Patton S. Particulate Constituents in Human and Bovine Milks. San Diego, CA, USA: Academic Press; 1995
  5. 5. Haug A, Høstmark AT, Harstad OM. Bovine milk in human nutrition—A review. Lipids in Health and Disease. 2007;6(1):25
  6. 6. Chandraprakash D, Khedkar SDK, Deosarkar S. Buffalo milk. In: Caballero B, Finglas P, Toldrá F, editors. The Encyclopedia of Food and Health. Oxford: Academic Press; 2016. pp. 522-528
  7. 7. Deuraseh N. The urine of camels. Treatment of diseases in AL-Tibb Al-Nabawi. Internal Medicine Journal. 2005;4(1):25-28
  8. 8. BAHS. Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics. 2012
  9. 9. Yassin MH, Soliman MM, Mostafa SA-E, Ali HA-M. Antimicrobial effects of camel milk against some bacterial pathogens. Journal of Food and Nutrition Research. 2015;3(3):162-168
  10. 10. Ziane M, Couvert O, Le Chevalier P, Moussa-Boudjemaa B, Leguerinel I. Identification and characterization of aerobic spore forming bacteria isolated from commercial camel’s milk in south of Algeria. Small Ruminant Research. 2016;137:59-64
  11. 11. Al-Ashqar RA, Salem KMA-M, Al Herz AKM, Al-Haroon AI, Alluwaimi AM. The CD markers of camel (Camelus dromedarius) milk cells during mastitis: The LPAM-1 expression is an indication of possible mucosal nature of the cellular trafficking. Research in Veterinary Science. 2015;99:77-81
  12. 12. Bornstein S. Important ectoparasites of Alpaca (Vicugna pacos). Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica. 2010;52(1):S17
  13. 13. Yagil R. The camel: Self-sufficiency in animal protein in drought-stricken areas. World Animal Review. 1986
  14. 14. Abu-Lehia I. Composition of camel milk. Milchwissenschaft Milk Science International. 1987;42:368
  15. 15. Al Kanhal HA. Compositional, technological and nutritional aspects of dromedary camel milk. International Dairy Journal. 2010;20(12):811-821
  16. 16. Konuspayeva G, Faye B, Loiseau G. The composition of camel milk: A meta-analysis of the literature data. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis. 2009;22(2):95-101
  17. 17. Onjoro P, Schwartz HJ, Njoka EN, Ottaro JM. Effects of mineral status in the soil, forage, water, blood, milk, urine and faeces on milk production of lactating, free ranging camels in northern Kenya. In: Proc DeutscherTropentag. 2003. pp. 8-10
  18. 18. Kula J. Medicinal values of camel milk. International Journal of Veterinary Science & Research. 2016;2(1):018-025
  19. 19. Haenlein G. About the evolution of goat and sheep milk production. Small Ruminant Research. 2007;68(1-2):3-6
  20. 20. FAO. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2016
  21. 21. Pakistan Go. Economic Survey of Pakistan 2016-2017
  22. 22. Amigo L, Fotencha J. Goat milk. In: Fuquay JW, Fox PF, McSweeney PLH, editors. Encyclopedia of Dairy Sciences. 2nd ed. London: Elsevier Ltd; 2011. pp. 484-493
  23. 23. Futuyma DJ, Moreno G. The evolution of ecological specialization. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics. 1988;19(1):207-233
  24. 24. Park YW, Haenlein GF. Overview of milk of non bovine mammals. In: Handbook of Milk of Non-bovine Mammals. 2006. p. 3e9
  25. 25. Čagalj M, Brezovečki A, Mikulec N, Antunac N. Composition and properties of mare’s milk of Croatian Coldblood horse breed. Mljekarstvo/Dairy. 2014;64(1)
  26. 26. Salimei E. Animals that Produce Dairy Foods–Donkey. 2011
  27. 27. Pulina G, Nudda A, Battacone G, Cannas A. Effects of nutrition on the contents of fat, protein, somatic cells, aromatic compounds, and undesirable substances in sheep milk. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 2006;131(3-4):255-291
  28. 28. Kapadiya DB, Prajapati DB, Jain AK, Mehta BM, Darji VB, Aparnathi KD. Comparison of Surti goat milk with cow and buffalo milk for gross composition, nitrogen distribution, and selected minerals content. Veterinary World. 2016;9(7):710
  29. 29. Miranda G, Mahé MF, Leroux C, Martin P. Proteomic tools to characterize the protein fraction of Equidae milk. Proteomics. 2004;4(8):2496-2509
  30. 30. Roginski H, Fuquay JW, Fox PF. Encyclopedia of Dairy Sciences. Vol. 1-4. Academic press; 2003
  31. 31. Kunz C, Rudloff S. Health benefits of milk derived carbohydrates. Bulletin of the International Dairy Federation. 2002
  32. 32. Viladomiu M, Hontecillas R, Bassaganya-Riera J. Modulation of inflammation and immunity by dietary conjugated linoleic acid. European Journal of Pharmacology. 2016;785:87-95
  33. 33. Silanikove N, Leitner G, Merin U, Prosser C. Recent advances in exploiting goat’s milk: Quality, safety and production aspects. Small Ruminant Research. 2010;89(2-3):110-124
  34. 34. Park Y, Juárez M, Ramos M, Haenlein G. Physico-chemical characteristics of goat and sheep milk. Small Ruminant Research. 2007;68(1-2):88-113
  35. 35. Parodi PW. Milk fat in human nutrition. Australian Journal of Dairy Technology. 2004;59(1):3-59
  36. 36. El-Agamy EI, Nawar M, Shamsia SM, Awad S, Haenlein GF. Are camel milk proteins convenient to the nutrition of cow milk allergic children?. Small Ruminant Research. Mar 1, 2009;82(1):1-6
  37. 37. MacGibbon AK, Taylor MW. Composition and structure of bovine milk lipids. In: Advanced dairy chemistry vol. 2 lipids. Boston, MA: Springer; 2006. pp. 1-42
  38. 38. Williams EA, Coxhead JM, Mathers JC. Anti-cancer effects of butyrate: Use of micro-array technology to investigate mechanisms. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 2003;62(1):107-115
  39. 39. Molkentin J. Occurrence and biochemical characteristics of natural bioactive substances in bovine milk lipids. The British Journal of Nutrition. 2000;84(S1):47-53
  40. 40. Korhonen H, Pihlanto-Leppäla A, Rantamäki P, Tupasela T. Impact of processing on bioactive proteins and peptides. Trends in Food Science & Technology. 1998;9(8-9):307-319
  41. 41. Lourenco R, Camilo M. Taurine: A conditionally essential amino acid in humans? An overview in health and disease. Nutrición Hospitalaria. 2002;17(6):262-270
  42. 42. Jauhiainen T, Korpela R. Milk peptides and blood pressure. The Journal of Nutrition. 2007;137(3):825S-829S
  43. 43. Roginski H, Fuquay JW, Fox PF. Encyclopedia of dairy sciences. Volumes 1-4. Academic press; 2003
  44. 44. Kunz C, Rudloff S, Baier W, Klein N, Strobel S. Oligosaccharides in human milk: Structural, functional, and metabolic aspects. Annual Review of Nutrition. 2000;20(1):699-722
  45. 45. Insel P, Turner R, Ross D. Nutrition, American Dietetic Association. USA: Jones and Bartlett; 2004
  46. 46. Dodig S, Čepelak I. The facts and controverses about selenium. Acta Pharmaceutica. 2004;54(4):261-276
  47. 47. Abbaspour N, Hurrell R, Kelishadi R. Review on iron and its importance for human health. Journal of Research in Medical Sciences: The Official Journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. 2014;19(2):164
  48. 48. AI-Attas A. Determination of essential elements in milk and urine of camel and in Nigella sativa seeds. Arab Journal of Nuclear Sciences and Applications. 2009;42(4):59-67
  49. 49. Sahai D. Buffalo Milk: Chemistry and Processing Technology. Karnal, India: Shalini International (SI) Publications; 1996
  50. 50. Oliver SP, Jayarao BM, Almeida RA. Foodborne pathogens in milk and the dairy farm environment: Food safety and public health implications. Foodborne Pathogens and Disease. 2005;2(2):115-129
  51. 51. Sakkas L, Moutafi A, Moschopoulou E, Moatsou G. Assessment of heat treatment of various types of milk. Food Chemistry. 2014;159:293-301
  52. 52. Davis BJ, Li CX, Nachman KE. A literature review of the risks and benefits of consuming raw and pasteurized cow’s milk. In: A Response to the Request from the Maryland House of Delegates’ Health and Government Operations Committee John Hopkins Report; Maryland, USA. 2014
  53. 53. Efigênia M, Povoa B, Moraes-Santos T. Effect of heat treatment on the nutritional quality of milk proteins. International Dairy Journal. 1997;7(8-9):609-612
  54. 54. Felfoul I, Jardin J, Gaucheron F, Attia H, Ayadi M. Proteomic profiling of camel and cow milk proteins under heat treatment. Food Chemistry. 2017;216:161-169
  55. 55. Lajnaf R, Picart-Palmade L, Attia H, Marchesseau S, Ayadi M. The effect of pH and heat treatments on the foaming properties of purified α-lactalbumin from camel milk. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces. 2017;156:55-61
  56. 56. Mehaia MA. Vitamin C and riboflavin content in camels milk: Effects of heat treatments. Food Chemistry. 1994;50(2):153-155
  57. 57. Croissant AE, Washburn S, Dean L, Drake M. Chemical properties and consumer perception of fluid milk from conventional and pasture-based production systems. Journal of Dairy Science. 2007;90(11):4942-4953
  58. 58. Lee A, Barbano D, Drake M. The influence of ultra-pasteurization by indirect heating versus direct steam injection on skim and 2% fat milks. Journal of Dairy Science. 2017;100(3):1688-1701
  59. 59. Yeung CHC, Gohil P, Rangan AM, Flood VM, Arcot J, Gill TP, et al. Modelling of the impact of universal added sugar reduction through food reformulation. Scientific Reports. 2017;7(1):17392
  60. 60. Gliguem H, Birlouez-Aragon I. Effects of sterilization, packaging, and storage on vitamin C degradation, protein denaturation, and glycation in fortified milks. Journal of Dairy Science. 2005;88(3):891-899
  61. 61. Geicu OI, Stanca L, Dinischiotu A, Serban AI. Proteomic and immunochemical approaches to understanding the glycation behaviour of the casein and β-lactoglobulin fractions of flavoured drinks under UHT processing conditions. Scientific Reports. 2018;8(1):12869
  62. 62. Oldfield D, Taylor M, Singh H. Effect of preheating and other process parameters on whey protein reactions during skim milk powder manufacture. International Dairy Journal. 2005;15(5):501-511
  63. 63. Erbersdobler HF, Somoza V. Forty years of furosine-forty years of using Maillard reaction products as indicators of the nutritional quality of foods. Molecular Nutrition & Food Research. 2007;51(4):423-430
  64. 64. Stewart A, Grandison A, Fagan C, Ryan A, Festring D, Parker JK. Changes in the volatile profile of skim milk powder prepared under different processing conditions and the effect on the volatile flavor profile of model white chocolate. Journal of dairy science. Oct 1, 2018;101(10):8822-8836
  65. 65. Maifreni M, Frigo F, Bartolomeoli I, Buiatti S, Picon S, Marino M. Bacterial biofilm as a possible source of contamination in the microbrewery environment. Food Control. 2015;50:809-814
  66. 66. Scott SA, Brooks JD, Rakonjac J, Walker KM, Flint SH. The formation of thermophilic spores during the manufacture of whole milk powder. International Journal of Dairy Technology. 2007;60(2):109-117
  67. 67. Bourne DG, Høj L, Webster NS, Swan J, Hall MR. Biofilm development within a larval rearing tank of the tropical rock lobster, Panulirus ornatus. Aquaculture. 2006;260(1-4):27-38
  68. 68. Zou M, Liu D. A systematic characterization of the distribution, biofilm-forming potential and the resistance of the biofilms to the CIP processes of the bacteria in a milk powder processing factory. Food Research International. 2018;113:316-326
  69. 69. Burgess SA, Lindsay D, Flint SH. Thermophilic bacilli and their importance in dairy processing. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2010;144(2):215-225
  70. 70. Griep ER, Cheng Y, Moraru CI. Efficient removal of spores from skim milk using cold microfiltration: Spore size and surface property considerations. Journal of dairy science. Nov 1, 2018;101(11):9703-9713
  71. 71. De Jonghe V, Coorevits A, De Block J, Van Coillie E, Grijspeerdt K, Herman L, et al. Toxinogenic and spoilage potential of aerobic spore-formers isolated from raw milk. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2010;136(3):318-325
  72. 72. Vicini J, Etherton T, Kris-Etherton P, Ballam J, Denham S, Staub R, et al. Survey of retail milk composition as affected by label claims regarding farm-management practices. Journal of the American Dietetic Association. 2008;108(7):1198-1203
  73. 73. Filipejová T, Kováčik J, Kirchnerová K, Foltýs V. Changes in milk composition as a result of metabolic disorders of dairy cows. Potravinarstvo Slovak Journal of Food Sciences. 2011;5(1):10-16
  74. 74. Nickerson SC. Milk production: Factors affecting milk composition. In: Milk Quality. Boston, MA: Springer; 1995. pp. 3-24
  75. 75. Nobrega DB, Naushad S, Naqvi SA, Condas LA, Saini V, Kastelic JP, et al. Prevalence and genetic basis of antimicrobial resistance in non-aureus staphylococci isolated from Canadian dairy herds. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2018;9:256
  76. 76. Sawant A, Sordillo L, Jayarao B. A survey on antibiotic usage in dairy herds in Pennsylvania. Journal of Dairy Science. 2005;88(8):2991-2999
  77. 77. Berruga M, Molina M, Noves B, Roman M, Molina A. In vitro study about the effect of several penicillins during the fermentation of yogurt made from ewe’s milk. Milchwissenschaft. 2007;62(3):303-305
  78. 78. Union E. Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC. Official Journal of the European Union. 2009;5:2009
  79. 79. Wilbey RA. Food Packaging and Shelf life: A Practical Guide. International Journal of Dairy Technology. Nov 2011;64(4):598-599
  80. 80. Manfredi M, Fantin V, Vignali G, Gavara R. Environmental assessment of antimicrobial coatings for packaged fresh milk. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2015;95:291-300
  81. 81. Kerry J, Butler P. Smart Packaging Technologies for Fast Moving Consumer Goods. John Wiley & Sons; 2008
  82. 82. Alavi S, Thomas S, Sandeep KP, Kalarikkal N, Varghese J, Yaragalla S, editors. Polymers for packaging applications. CRC Press; Sep 12, 2014
  83. 83. Wu X, Lu Y, Xu H, Lv M, Hu D, He Z, et al. Challenges to improve the safety of dairy products in China. Trends in food science & technology. 2018;76:6-14
  84. 84. Singh D, Kumar S, Singh B, Bardhan D. Economic losses due to important diseases of bovines in central India. Veterinary World. Aug 1, 2014;7(8)
  85. 85. Singh B, Prasad S. Modelling of economic losses due to some important diseases in goats in India. Agricultural Economics Research Review. 2008;21(347-2016-16708):297
  86. 86. Sharma N. Economically important production diseases of dairy animals. In: SMVS Dairy Year Book. Gurgoan, India: Sarva Manav Vikash Samiti; 2010. pp. 47-65
  87. 87. Ashfaq M, Razzaq A, Hassan S. Factors affecting the economic losses due to livestock diseases: a case study of district Faisalabad. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences. Jun 1, 2015;52(2)
  88. 88. Hortet P, Seegers H. Calculated milk production losses associated with elevated somatic cell counts in dairy cows: Review and critical discussion. Veterinary Research. 1998;29(6):497-510
  89. 89. Feskanich D, Willett WC, Colditz GA. Calcium, vitamin D, milk consumption, and hip fractures: A prospective study among postmenopausal women. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2003;77(2):504-511
  90. 90. ] Council EU. Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European parliament and of the council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin. Official Journal of the European Communities, Series L. 2004;139:55-205
  91. 91. Anadón A, Martínez-Larrañaga MR, Ares I, Martínez MA. Overview: “Preclinical studies of dairy Milk and products on health”. In: Nutrients in Dairy and their Implications on Health and Disease. Elsevier; 2018. pp. 261-285
  92. 92. Marguí E, Queralt I, Hidalgo M. Application of X-ray fluorescence spectrometry to determination and quantitation of metals in vegetal material. TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry. 2009;28(3):362-372
  93. 93. Pashkova GV, Smagunova AN, Finkelshtein AL. X-ray fluorescence analysis of milk and dairy products: A review. TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry. 2018;106:183-189
  94. 94. Amjad A, Ullah R, Khan S, Bilal M, Khan A. Raman spectroscopy based analysis of milk using random forest classification. Vibrational Spectroscopy. Nov 1, 2018;99:124-129
  95. 95. Wall SK, Wellnitz O, Bruckmaier RM, Schwarz D. Differential somatic cell count in milk before, during, and after lipopolysaccharide-and lipoteichoic-acid-induced mastitis in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science. 2018;101(6):5362-5373
  96. 96. Damm M, Holm C, Blaabjerg M, Bro MN, Schwarz D. Differential somatic cell count—A novel method for routine mastitis screening in the frame of dairy herd improvement testing programs. Journal of Dairy Science. 2017;100(6):4926-4940
  97. 97. Gonçalves ACS, Roma Júnior LC, Privatti RT, Salles MSV, Paz CCP, Zadra LEF, et al. Somatic cell count obtained by Ekomilk scan® and correlations with other methods of analysis. Ciência Rural. 2018;48(6)
  98. 98. Dingwell RT, Leslie KE, Schukken YH, Sargeant JM, Timms LL. Evaluation of the California mastitis test to detect an intramammary infection with a major pathogen in early lactation dairy cows. The Canadian Veterinary Journal. 2003;44(5):413
  99. 99. Barnum D, Newbould F. The use of the California mastitis test for the detection of bovine mastitis. The Canadian Veterinary Journal. 1961;2(3):83
  100. 100. Dingwell R, Leslie K, Timms LL, Schukken Y, Sargent J. Evaluation of the California mastitis test to determine udder health status of early lactation dairy cows. Animal Industry Report. 2004;650(1):72
  101. 101. Lippolis JD, Reinhardt TA. Proteomic survey of bovine neutrophils. Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology. 2005;103(1-2):53-65
  102. 102. Viguier C, Arora S, Gilmartin N, Welbeck K, O’Kennedy R. Mastitis detection: Current trends and future perspectives. Trends in Biotechnology. 2009;27(8):486-493

Written By

Amjad Aqib, Muhammad Ijaz, Aftab Anjum, Muhammad Kulyar, Muhammad Shoaib and Shahid Farooqi

Submitted: 30 September 2018 Reviewed: 03 December 2018 Published: 01 March 2019