| Summary: | Fluorescent light exposure has well documented negative effects on fluid milk through oxidation reactions. A shift to light-emitting diode (LED) lights in retail dairy cases has occurred due to increased energy efficiency, but the effects of LED light on fluid milk are not known. The objective was to study the interaction of light protective additives (LPA) with a high oxygen barrier package under fluorescent and LED lighting conditions simulating a retail refrigerated dairy case. The extent of oxidation in 2% milk packaged in polyethylene terephthalate (PET) packages with different light interference properties (UV barrier, 2.1% titanium dioxide (TiO2) LPA, 4.0% TiO2 LPA, 6.6% TiO2 LPA) under light exposure up to 72h was compared to control packages (light-exposed, light-protected). Chemical measures of oxidation included dissolved oxygen content, formation of secondary lipid oxidation products, riboflavin degradation, and volatile analysis by electronic nose. Changes in dissolved oxygen content were associated closely with oxidation changes in milk over 72h. PET with 6.6% TiO2 was the most successful package, based on triangle test methodology, protecting milk sensory quality similar to light-protected milk through 8h LED light exposure. Based on a 9-point hedonic scale, (1=dislike extremely, 9=like extremely), consumers liked milk stored under LED light more (α=0.05; 6.59 ± 1.60) than milk stored under fluorescent light (5.87 ± 1.93). LED light is less detrimental to milk quality than fluorescent light and PET with high levels of TiO2 can protect milk quality for short periods of time under typical retail storage conditions. === Master of Science in Life Sciences
|
|---|
