IJPCBS 2012, 2(4), 692-695

Vijaya Bhaskara Reddy et al.

ISSN: 2249-9504

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL, CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES

Available online at www.ijpcbs.com

Research Article

MICROBIAL ANALYSIS AND CONSTITUENTS OF MIXED MILK SAMPLES IN RURAL AREAS OF PILERU CHITTOOR DISTRICT: ANDHRAPRADESH
M. Vijaya Bhaskara Reddy1*, P. Sasikala1 and A. Karthik1 Department of Livestock Production and Management, Microbiology, Sri Venkateswara veterinary university, College of Veterinary Science, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India.

ABSTRACT The present study was conducted to find out the chemical and microbial quality of various milk samples collected from different sources of milk procured from rural areas of Pileru. The Fat, SNF and Protein percentages of milk samples collected from Dairy Experimental Station were higher than the other milk samples collected from commercial dairies of Sangam, Balaji and Heritage and local vendors. The milk samples collected from local vendors recorded lower Fat, SNF and Protein percentages. No significant difference was observed in the milk samples collected from commercial dairies of Sangam, Balaji and Heritage with regard to Fat, SNF and Protein percentages. None of the milk samples collected from Dairy Experimental Station was found to be adulterated with water, whereas higher percentage of water was observed in the milk samples of local vendors. The Standard Plate Count of milk from local vendors is higher followed by Dairy Experimental Station. Presence of E. coli organisms in the milk samples collected from local vendors and Dairy Experimental Station indicated the extraneous contamination and unhygienic conditions of milking barn. Keywords: Chemical quality, Microbial analysis milk, rural areas.

INTRODUCTION Dairy farming is a dynamic and highly competitive industry in todays world. Efficient marketing of milk is as important as efficient production. Marketing of milk is highly influenced by its quality. It is convenient to test the milk not only for quality, but also for its suitability for further processing and manufacturing of various indigenous and other dairy products and also for its acceptance reception by consumers (Mankar, 2005). Quality of milk as judged by the bacterial count varies to large extent due to a number of factors. Milk being secreted from healthy glands ought to be nearly sterile.

However, normal milk, on leaving the udder contains organisms from the teat canals and ducts. From the point of production up to reception, milk passes through various stages and in the process, the microbial population increases enormously, particularly when it has not been handled properly. The method of production (Hand milking), environmental condition of the barn/ surroundings, health of the animals, health of the milk man and sanitization practices followed at various stages directly influence the chemical quality and microbial load of the raw milk. Contaminated milk contains coliform organisms, peptonizing

692

IJPCBS 2012, 2(4), 692-695

Vijaya Bhaskara Reddy et al.

ISSN: 2249-9504

bacteria and lactic acid producing bacteria. It is well known fact that education and economic resources of the person help in developing awareness in all activities of life. Consumers expect that the milk should by hygienic and unadulterated and for that, most of them are ready to pay incentives. This attitude of consumers is helpful to motivate the farmers to adopt clean milk production practices (Saha and Gupta, 2004). In rural India, living standard of dairy farmers may influence the sanitary production and chemical quality of milk. Hence, the present investigation was carried out to find out the chemical quality and microbial load of various milk samples collected from different sources in rural areas of Pileru, Chittoor District. MATERIALS AND METHODS The present study was conducted to find out the chemical quality and microbial load of various milk samples in rural areas of Pileru. In total, 50 milk samples were collected from 5 different sources viz. vendors, Dairy Experimental Station (DES), College of Veterinary Science, Tirupati, commercial dairies of Sangam, Balaji and Heritage, 10 from each source by using multistage random sampling technique. The milk samples were mixed milk containing varying proportions of cow and buffalo milk. The milk samples were tested for chemical analysis for Fat, Solid Not Fat (SNF), Protein, Density and added water by using LAKTAN milk analyzer. The microbial analysis of the above milk samples was also studied for Standard Plate Count (SPC) and E. coil organisms. The data of the above parameters was statistically analyzed as per the procedures laid down by Snedechor and Cochran (1994). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Chemical analysis of various milk samples collected from Sangam, Balaji and Heritage dairies, Vendors and DES in presented in Table 1. The mean values of fat (%) in various milk samples obtained from Sangam, Balaji and Heritage dairies, Vendors and DES were 3.090.01, 3.490.01, 3.090.01,

3.940.33, and 6.840.92 respectively. The fat percentage of milk sample collected from Dairy Experimental Station was significantly (P=0.000) higher than that of other sources. However, there was no significant difference in the fat percentage of milk samples collected from the commercial dairies of Sangam, Balaji and Heritage and Vendors. These values were slightly more than the specifications for tonned milk i.e. 3.0%. The SNF content of milk samples observed in the present study were 7.640.04, 7.590.04, 7.740.05, 5.660.82, and 9.220.13 %, respectively. The SNF content of milk sample collected from Dairy Experimental Station was on par with the specifications i.e. 9.0 % and significantly (P=0.000) higher than that of milk samples collected from Balaji commercial dairy and vendors. But, no significant difference was observed among the milk samples collected from Dairy Experimental Station, Sangam, Balaji and Heritage commercial dairies. The SNF content of milk sample collected from local vendors was significantly (P=0.000) lower than that of milk samples collected from other sources. However, the SNF values of Sangam, Balaji and Heritage commercial dairies did not show any significant difference. The lower SNF content in all milk samples except from Dairy Experimental Station might be due to the variation in the amount of added water. The average values of protein (%) in various milk samples collected from Sangam, Balaji and Heritage commercial dairies, Vendors and DES were 2.700.05, 2.550.03, 2.630.02, 1.860.19 and 3.360.07 %, respectively. The milk samples collected from Dairy Experimental Station recorded significantly (P=0.000) higher protein percentage when compared to milk samples collected from other sources. The milk samples collected from local vendors showed significantly (P=0.000) lower protein percentage when compared with DES and commercial dairies of Sangam, Balaji and Heritage. However, there was no significant difference among the milk samples collected from commercial dairies of Sangam, Balaji

693

IJPCBS 2012, 2(4), 692-695

Vijaya Bhaskara Reddy et al.

ISSN: 2249-9504

and Heritage. The possible reason for lower protein percentage might be due to mixed milk samples. The mean values of density in various milk samples obtained from Sangam, Balaji and Heritage dairies, Vendors and DES were 26.560.31, 26.190.26, 27.070.10, 18.652.56 and 27.871.77, respectively. The density of milk samples obtained from local vendors was significantly (P= 0.002) lower than that of other sources. There was no significant difference in the density of milk samples obtained from commercial dairies of Sangam, Balaji and Heritage and Dairy Experimental Station. The average values of added water (%) in various milk samples collected from Sangam, Balaji and Heritage commercial dairies, Vendors and DES were 8.250.63, 9.500.50, 7.200.20 and 44.200.70, respectively. The added water (%) in milk samples collected from local vendors was significantly (P=0.000) higher when compared to the milk samples collected from other sources. The possible reason for higher added water (%) might be due to adulteration of water in the milk. There was no significant difference in the water content of milk samples obtained from commercial dairies of Sangam, Balaji and Heritage. However, no added water was detected in the milk sample collected from Dairy Experimental Station which indicates that there was no adulteration with water. The data on microbial analysis of various milk samples collected from Sangam, Balaji and Heritage dairies, Vendors and DES is presented in Table 2. The mean values of Standard Plate Count SPC in various milk samples obtained from Sangam, Balaji and Heritage commercial dairies, Vendors and DES were 21,2501250, 26,0002000, 19,5002000, 65,00,00055500 and 42,50,00027,800, respectively. The Standard Plate Count was significantly (P=0.000) higher in the milk sample of local vendors for higher SPC might be due to improper handling of milk and unhygienic maintenance of milk cans. Saharia and Saikia (1996) reported lower Standard Plate Count in milk samples collected from cross bred

cows maintained in wooden floors. The milk samples collected from Dairy Experimental Station also showed significantly higher Standard Plate Count that of commercial dairies of Sangam, Balaji and Heritage and lower Standard Plate Count when compared to the milk samples collected from local vendors. However, no significant difference was observed in Standard Plate Count of milk samples collected from commercial dairies of Sangam, Balaji and Heritage dairies because of subjecting of milk to pasteurization. The milk samples collected from local vendors and Dairy Experimental Station was positive for E.coil organisms which might be due to the contamination of milk utensils, improper cleaning of udder and unhygienic conditions of milking barn. Prasad et al. (2008) reported that the presence of coliform bacteria in milk is directly related to extraneous contaminations which were in agreement with the present observations. The milk samples collected from commercial dairies of Sangam, Balaji and Heritage did not show the presence of E.coil organisms since the milk was subjected to pasteurization before packaging. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors are grateful to the Head of the Department of Livestock Production and Management, College of Veterinary Science, Tirupati for providing necessary facilities regarding conduct of experiment. REFERENCES 1. Mankar, A.M., Ingole, A.S. and Murkute, J.S. (2005) . Survey on adulteration of the milk received at Government milk scheme, Nagpur. Indian J. Dairy Science, 58(1):71- 2. 2. Prasad, S.K.., Singh Ramveer and Singh, J.P. (2008). Impact of socioeconomic status on microbial quality of buffalo milk. Indian Dairyman, 60(5):55- 7. 3. Saha, B. and Gupta, J. (2004). Consumers perception on quality milk. India J. Dairy Science, 57(5): 361- 4.

694

IJPCBS 2012, 2(4), 692-695

Vijaya Bhaskara Reddy et al.

ISSN: 2249-9504

4. Saharia, J. and Saikia, S. (1994). Effect of housing dairy cattle on bacteriological quality of milk. Indian J.Dairy Science., 40 (7): 456- 8.

5. Snedecor, G.W. and Cochran, W.G. (1994). Statistical methods. [8th ed., Iowa State University Press, Ames, USA.

Table 1: Chemical Analysis of various milk samples collected from different sources
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5 Source of milk Sangam Balaji Heritage Vendor DES P-values df, Fat (%) 3.06-3.10 (3.090.01)a 3.46-3.51 (3.490.01)a 3.06-3.10 (3.090.01)a 3.1-4.62 (3.940.33)a 5.60-9.57 (6.840.92)a 0.000 4 SNF (%) 7.56-7.72 (7..640.04)bc 7.50-7.68 (7.590.04)b 7.60-7.80 (7.740.05)bc 4.08-7.86 (5.660.82)a 9.04-9.61 (9.220.13)c 0.000 4 Protein (%) 2.58-2.81 (2.700.05)b 2.47-2.61 (2.550.03)b 2.58-2.68 (2.630.02)b 1.43-2.32 (1.860.01)a 3.27-3.58 (3.360.07)c 0.000 4 Density 25.82-27.32 (26.560.31)b 25.52-26.80 (26.190.26)b 26.82-27.30 (27.070.10)b 12.73-24.22 (18.652.56)a 24.25-32.02 (27.871.77)a 0.002 4 Added Water (%) 7.0-10.0 (8.250.63)a 8.0-10.0 (9.50.5)a 7.0-8.0 (7.20.2)a 38-51 (44.22.7)b 0 0.000 4

Figures in parenthesis are mean S.E One-way ANOVA followed by Tukeys post hoc test using SPSS software (version-10.0) Means with different superscripts are significantly different at respective Pvalues.

Table 2: Microbial analysis of various milk samples collected from different sources
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Source of milk Sangam Balaji Heritage Vendor DES P-values df Standard Plate Count 20,000-25,000 (21,2501250)a 22,000-30,000 (26,0002000)a 19,000-20,000 (19,5002000)a 52,00,000-78,00,000 (65,00,00055500)c 36,00,000-49,00,000 (42,50,00027,800)b 0.001 4 E-coli -ve -ve -ve +ve +ve --4

Figures in parenthesis are mean S.E. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukeys post hoc test using SPSS software (version-10.0) Means with different superscripts are significantly different at respective Pvalues.

695