Milk Adukteration Detection Review

See
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292943630
Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

Article in Sensor Letters January 2016
DOI: 10.1166/sl.2016.3580
CITATION
READS
1,063
3 authors:
Siuli Das
Bhaswati Goswami
Ramrao Adik Institute of Technology
Jadavpur University
16 PUBLICATIONS 102 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE
Karabi Biswas
Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Development of a low cost conductivity meter for aqua-agriculture View project
All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,

letting you access and read them immediately.
Available from: Siuli Das

Retrieved on: 03 November 2016
Copyright 2016 American Scientific Publishers

All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
SENSOR LETTERS
Vol. 14, 418, 2016

Siuli Das1 , Bhaswati Goswami2 , and Karabi Biswas3
1
Department of Instrumentation Engineering, Ramrao Adik Institute of Technology, Nerul, Navi Mumbai 400706, India
2
Department of Instrumentation and Electronics Engineering, Jadavpur University, Kolkata 700098, India
3
Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur 721302, India
(Received: 28 June 2015. Accepted: 1 July 2015)
REVIEW
Milk adulteration is a social problem. It exists both in the backward and advanced countries. Consumption of adulterated milk causes serious health problems and a great concern to the food industry. A large number of research papers have been published on milk adulteration and detection,
including some review papers. This paper tries to review from a different point of view. First it identifies different milk adulterants, methodologies adopted to adulterate the milk and the health hazards
related to the adulteration. Then it provides different detection techniques for individual adulterant
and a comprehensive study have been carried out on the detection technology by electrical means.
Keywords: Milk Adulteration, Health Hazard, Detection Techniques, Electrical Methods,

Nomenclature.
CONTENTS
Delivered by Publishing Technology

to: IIT
the ethical
andKharagpur
economical issue, it also creates health
16 Feb1 2016
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IP:
. . . 203.110.246.25
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .On:4Tue,hazards.
Some15:31:12
of them are renal and skin disease, eye
Publishers
2. Milk Adulterant and Its Detection . . . . . .Copyright:
. . . . . . . . . American
....
5 Scientific
and heart
problem and may also leads to cancer.25 So,
2.1. Chlorine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
for preventing these, determination of milk adulteration is
2.2. Antibiotics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
very important.
2.3. Non-Milk Proteins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
Most of the times, the adulteration is intentional to make
2.4. Low-Valued Milk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
2.5. Milk Powder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
greater profit, but sometimes it may be due to the lack
2.6. Color . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
of proper detecting technology and confusion regarding
2.7. Preservatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
appropriate drug administration practices6 among the dairy
2.8. Neutralizers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9
firm workers. It is observed that after mastitis treatment
2.9. Urea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9
2.10. Whey/Liquid whey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
of dairy animal there are traces of antibiotic residues in
2.11. Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
milk; and in absence of proper guideline about the lac3. Electrical Methods to Detect Milk Adulterants . . . . . . . . . . . 12
tation time and user friendly detector,7 often lactation is
3.1. Potentiometric Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
done in wrong time leading to antimicrobial residues in
3.2. Conductance Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
milk (if lactation performed early) or wastage of milk
3.3. Ultrasonic Detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.4. E-Nose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
(if lactation starts late).8
3.5. E-Tongue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Sometimes natural milk is adulterated with low value
3.6. Capacitance Growth Curve to Detect the
ingredient like water, whey etc. and is known as economic
Development of Micro Organism in Raw Milk . . . . . . . 14
adulteration. It is a very common practice by the milk sup3.7. Piezoelectric Sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
plier to add water or liquid-whey to milk9 10 to increase
3.8. Impedance Probe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
the volume11 of milk. Diluted milk reduces its nutritional
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
value, and contaminated water causes serious health probReferences and Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. INTRODUCTION
Milk adulteration is a very common food fraud and is
posing a big social problem in todays world. Apart from
Corresponding author; E-mail: siulidas2@gmail.com

Sensor Lett. 2016, Vol. 14, No. 1
lems. Addition of water changes specific gravity of the

milk and its natural color gets destroyed. To detect water in
milk mostly used scientific instrument is lactometer where
the change in specific gravity11 is measured. But to compensate specific gravity, different types of salt and sugar12
are used. Sometimes to retain its color a small amount of
coloring matter13 is added. Maltodextrine are used in dairy
1546-198X/2016/14/004/015
doi:10.1166/sl.2016.3580
Das et al.
detection of chemical adulterants sophisticated instrument

is required. With the advancement of technology, newer
techniques have been invented to detect different kinds of
milk adulterants, but in the same pace the complex methods of milk adulteration and varieties of milk adulterants
have been evolved. A large number of research papers have
been published on milk adulteration and detection, including some review papers.2435
This paper tries to review from a different point of
view. First it identifies different milk adulterants, the health
hazards related to the adulteration. It provides different
detection techniques for individual adulterant and comprehensive studies have been carried out on the detection
technology by electrical means.
2. MILK ADULTERANT AND ITS DETECTION

The measurement of milk quality is important for food
safety, as well as in the production process of the dairy
industry. There are several sophisticated methods such
as chromatography, spectroscopy etc. are used to detect
Siuli Das received the B.Tech. degree from Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Kharagpur,
India, and the Ph.D. degree from Jadavpur University (JU), Kolkata in 1993 and 2013,
respectively. She is currently Professor with the Department of Instrumentation Engineering,
Ramrao
Adikby
Institute
of Technology,
Nerul,
Mumbai. Her research interests are Sensor
Delivered
Publishing
Technology
to: Navi
IIT Kharagpur
development,
InstrumentOn:
system
and2016
Study
of fractional order systems.
IP: 203.110.246.25
Tue,design
16 Feb
15:31:12
Copyright: American Scientific Publishers
Bhaswati Goswami received the B.Tech., M.Tech., and Ph.D. degrees in applied physics
from the University of Calcutta, Kolkata, India. She is currently an Associate Professor in
the Instrumentation and Electronics Engineering Department in Jadavpur University (JU),
Kolkata. Her main areas of interest are filtering and estimation, sensor development, signal
processing, biomedical instrumentation.
Karabi Biswas received the B.Tech. degree from Indian Institute of Technology (IIT)
Kharagpur, India, the M.Tech. degree from Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India, and the
Ph.D. degree from IIT Kharagpur in 1992, 2000, and 2007, respectively. She is currently
an Associate Professor with the Department of Electrical Engineering, IIT Kharapur. Before
that she served Jadavpur University as a faculty in Instrumentation and Electronics engineering department from November, 1995. Her research interests are Sensor development,
Instrument system design and Study of fractional order systems.
Sensor Letters 14, 418, 2016
REVIEW
foods to add flavor and reduce the cost of the products.14

The other very common adulterant is addition of liquid
whey (the by-product after making cottage cheese from
milk). Some businessmen, for greater profit, use cheap
muriatic acid to prepare whey which causes serious health
problem and necessitate detection of adulterated milk with
whey. The uniqueness of this adulteration is that it does
not change the lactose content of the milk but increases
the acidity. And to neutralize the acidity, a small amount
of alkaline solution (e.g., NaOH) is added so that the consistency and shelf life of the milk is increased.15 Removal
of the cream or selling of skimmed or partially skimmed
milk as whole milk is also one form of milk adulteration.
Chemical adulterants are used for different purposes.
The common adulterants are starch, chlorine, hydrated
lime, sodium carbonate, formalin and ammonium sulfate.
To meet the deficit of milk, synthetic milk is prepared
by mixing urea, caustic soda, refined oil and common
detergents5 1620 which has poisonous effect. Widespread
use of chemical preservatives to preserve milk in warm
weather2123 is a great concern in food industry. For
REVIEW
Das et al.
of human body and its detection are discussed in the folmilk adulteration. Other analytical techniques are freezing
lowing sections:
point osmometry, capillary electrophoresis, thermometric
sensors, mass spectrometry, least-squares support vector
machine (LS-SVM) for detection of adulterants (starch,
2.1. Chlorine
whey, sucrose) in powdered milk.36 These conventional
Chlorine is added to compensate the density of the diluted
methods of analysis of food products include expensive
milk after addition of water. Mastitis in cow also raises
and sophisticated instruments. Such instrumental assessthe chlorine level in the milk.12 Chlorinated milk can
ment techniques are time consuming, tedious, expensive
cause clogging in arteries and develop heart problem.1
and require elaborate sample preparation. And in practice,
The method used in Ref. [12] for detection of chlorine
expert human panels have to be employed to judge the
is sequential injection analysis [SIA] based on titration
qualitative parameters in the food and beverage industry.
with silver cation. Flow injection analysis [FIA] based on
This method of assessment has some major drawbacks like
pseudo titrations are also used for detection of chloride in
fatigue, adverse mental state at times, and individual varimilk.43 Compared to FIA, SIA has the advantage of lower
ability of human experts.
reagent pumping and has the ability to perform analysis
There are thousands of different biosensing techniques
without system configuration. In SIA technique, because
used for detection of milk adulteration which are very difof the use of potentiometric detector, measurement is not
ficult to categories. A biosensor is an analytical tool that
affected by sample color or turbidity. Chlorine detection
in intimate contact with a transducer converts a biologin milk is also performed by titration with potentiometical signal into a measurable electrical signal. The bioric detection44 45 and conductometric sequential injection
logical components of the biosensor are enzymes, whole
analysis.46 47 This technique46 has great potential for oncells, tissues, receptors, and antibodies. Many biosensors
line measurements in many routine laboratories due to the
are integrated with the electrical sensors to detect milk
simplicity and convenience with which the sample manipadulteration.
ulation can be automated.
Often lactose concentration is used as a basic marker for
the evaluation of milk quality and the detection of abnor2.2. Antibiotics
malities. It has been found that milk from cows sufferMastitis in dairy cattle is the persistent, inflammatory reacing mastitis has low lactose levels.
Conzuelo
et al.37 have
tion of the
tissue. This is a most common disease in
Delivered
by Publishing
Technology
to: udder
IIT Kharagpur
reported an amperometric biosensors
to detect the lactose
IP: 203.110.246.25
On: Tue,dairy
16 Feb
2016
15:31:12
cattle.
Milk
of cows with sub-clinical mastitis enter
Copyright: American Scientific
Publishers
content of milk.
into food
chain and can be dangerous to humans. MastiThere has been extensive research in evaluating electis causes increased conductivity in milk due to increased
tronic noses for monitoring the quality of milk. E-nose
sodium and chloride ions, and is a well known method to
can monitor the aging of milk and can detect milk volatile
detect mastitis in milk.4853 Fernando et al. have reported
38 39
compounds.
The two main components of an electhat the accuracy of electrical conductivity detection of sub
tronic nose (E-nose) are the sensing system and the
clinical mastitis is better than all other indirect methods.
automated pattern recognition system.33 40 The common
Moreover, the adaptability of this measurement is more
pattern recognition systems are either principal component
in both manual and automatic cow-side mastitis detection
analysis (PCA), linear discriminant analysis (LDA) or artisystems.50
ficial neural network (ANN).
Antibiotics are used mainly to treat a variety of disPotentiometric electronic tongues using lipid/polymer
eases and 80% of dairy herds use antibiotics for treatmembranes has the ability to classify vast kinds of chemment of mastitis disease. These antibiotics in the form
ical substances into several groups, which can be found
of antimicrobial residues are found in abundance in
in the taste reception in biological systems.41 Mirjana
milk.5456 Some times these reagents are also added to
et al. have reported a potentiometric electronic tongue
increase the shelf life of milk.57 Common antimicrobial
42
to detect the quality of milk. The potentiometric elecdrugs are sulfonamides, nitrofurans,4 tetracyclines sultronic tongue reported by them includes an automatic samfonamides antimicrobial residue,58 10 beta-lactam antibipling system, a sensor array with a reference electrode, a
otics i.e., penicillin-G, ampicillin, amoxicillin, cloxacillin,
signal processing unit and a personal computer with the
oxacillin, dicloxacillin, cefadroxyl, cefalexin, cefoperarequired software (Astree 3.0.1.). The data obtained from
zone and cefuroxime.59 Presence of tetracycline, aromatic
the electronic tongue is processed by principal components
amines,32 gentamicin residue after mastitis treatment,7 60 61
analysis (PCA) to get the variance in the experimental
neomycin residues,62 63 sulfamethazine residues,64 65 chlodata.
ramphenicol residues,66 aflatoxin M1 contamination67 etc.
Several methods are available for detection of differare also a deep concern as milk adulterants. Intramament milk adulterants. And it has been found that different
mary infusion of antibiotics for mastities therapy is a major
types of milk adulterants are used depending upon its purreason for milk contamination.68 Pasteurization and other
poses. Some of the adulterants, their impact on the health
forms of heat treatment are effective for pathogenic micro
6
Das et al.
REVIEW
organisms but have limited effects on drug residues.7 24

and the relative standard deviation for penicillin G in milk
was 612% in the interval 2.012.5 g kg1 . For field
The USA food and drug administration (FDA) have idenapplication further optimization is required.
tified about eighty drug residues in animal-derived human
Benedetti et al.84 studied the detection of aflatoxin M1
food.69 70 Maximum residue limit has been set for global
69 71
content in milk by E-Nose system containing 12 metal
standardization.
oxide semiconductor (MOS) sensors and 12 MOSFETs.
Presence of antimicrobial reagents in milk may cause
It has been claimed that the E-nose classification was
potential risk to the consumer. Residues of these drugs
in complete agreement with aflatoxin M1 content meain milk poses serious health hazards such as allergic
sured by an Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)
reactions,72 increase in the number of antibiotic resistant,73
procedure.
interference in intestinal flora7 74 and some of them
(such as sulfamethazine residues) may have carcinogenic
2.3. Non-Milk Proteins
properties.4 It may also cause tissue damage.75 It interMilk, milk powder and other dairy products are often adulferes in the bacterial fermentation process which proterated by low priced non-milk proteins such as soy, pea
duces important losses in fermented products.7 57 74 76
and soluble wheat proteins (SWP).56 8587 Bovine rennet
Very low amount of penicillin residue is a potential cause
77
whey powder (a waste product from cheese production)
of urticaria.
is sometimes mixed in milk powder.56 Sometimes milk
There are several detection techniques available in the
fat is replaced by fat from other sources which may also
literature. Different types of test kits are also available
pose a risk to human health. Fluorescence Spectroscopy88
to detect antimicrobial residue in milk. BRT is such a
is used to rapidly detect adulteration of milk fat with
detection kit based on the microbiological inhibitor test.
vegetable oil. Milk is often adulterated with low priced
There are different versions of BRT test with different
oils (e.g., sunflower oil) and foreign fat.25 89 90 Foreign
trade names, such as BR-Test, BR-AS, BR-Blue Star,
74
fat in milk fat can be detected by analyzing triacylglycBRT AiM. Charm AIM-96 (antimicrobial) is a microerols (TAGs) using gasliquid chromatography (GLC).91
titre plate test, and Charm-ROSA (-lactum and tetraThis
is done by separating milk fat triacylglycerols (TAGs)
cyclines) kits based on immunoreceptor assay utilizing
according
to their chain length (total carbon number) by
ROSA (Rapid One Step Assay) lateral flow technology
gasliquid
chromatography
are also used to test57 antimicrobial
residue.
Spot test isTechnology to: IIT Kharagpur(GLC). TAG analysis is used to
Delivered
by Publishing
milk fat with partially hydrogenated vegetable oils
also a common method to detect
residue
ofTue,detect
IP:antimicrobial
203.110.246.25
On:
16 Feb 2016
15:31:12
85
(PHVOs).
Gas-liquid chromatography is widely used for
Copyright:
American
penicillin, cephaphirin and cloxacillin78
which identifies
an Scientific Publishers
analysis of the fatty acid (FA) profile of milk fat (MF)
element or compound by means of a reagent that produces
to detect adulteration with foreign fat.90 To distinguish
a characteristic color change or precipitate. Various colbetween pure milk fat from adulterated milk fat linear disors change in presence of antimicrobial residue are also
criminant analysis is applied. Mixtures containing greater
common techniques in detection of antimicrobial residue.
than 3% foreign fat can be detected. NIR spectroscopy
Some of the test kits based on color change detection are
is used to detect foreign fat in milk.92 The NIR method
penzyme milk test, SNAP test and Lactek test.79
indicates that the adulteration of the fat with as little as
Chromatography is one of the common methods to
3% foreign fat could be detected simply and rapidly. Lawdetect antimicrobial residue. High performance liquid
ton et al. have reported to determine the fat content of
chromatography (HPLC) is used to detect -lactum
the milk by measuring electrical conductivity and capacresidue in milk.4 70 80 A Hewlett Packard (HP) model 1050
itive reactance of milk.93 Measurement was carried out
HPLC with a Finnigan LCQ ion trap mass spectrometer is
at 100 kHz to avoid electrode polarization. The measureused for analysis of antimicrobial residues.71 This method,
ment requires careful temperature control. Reversed-phase
using ion trap liquid chromatography mass spectrometry
HPLC method in combination with a fluorescence detec(LC-MS/MS) provides a rapid quantitative analysis of milk
tor is used to detect soy protein in milk.94 Sulfate capsamples for -lactum antibodies at low concentration. Liqillary electrophoresis (SDS-CE)86 and chromatography95
uid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry is often
are used to detect presence of soy protein in milk
used to detect beta-lactam antibiotics.69
powder.
Somatic cell count (SCC) has become a viable method
Capone et al. have used an E-nose to measure the develto detect antibiotic residue as SCC values are significantly
opment of rancidity (chemical composition of fats, oils and
higher for the milk with antibiotic residue which can be
other lipids) in UHT (ultra high temperature) and pasteurdetected by detecting the conductivity.81 82 In screening
ized milk during 8 and 3 days with five different SnO2 thin
test, antimicrobial residue can be detected by treating with
films, prepared using solgel technology. The claim was,
a chemical reagent.83 Biosensor assay, based on surface
the sensors could distinguish between different types of
plasmon resonance (SPR), is also widely used to detect
milk as well as determine the degree of rancidity of milks.
microbial residue.54 The detection limit of -lactum by
Similar results have been reported by Labreche et al.96
this method is below or near the maximum residue limit
with an E-nose containing 18 MOS sensors.
REVIEW
Das et al.
2.4. Low-Valued Milk

country has milk powder in excess or subsidy is provided
for dried powder milk.125 The method used to detect skim
Milk is adulterated by mixing lower valued milk with
milk powder adulteration in fresh milk is called FAST125
higher valued milk. For example often goat milk is adul97
(Fluorescence of advanced maillard products and soluble
terated with cow milk for greater profit. It has been
tryptophan). This method is simple, rapid, low-cost and
found that health hazards related to this practice are not
sensitive enabling the detection of 5% reconstituted milk
well defined (some may have allergy in cows milk) but
in fresh milk.
from commercial and ethical point of view this is a great
concern in food industry.98 Low priced cow milk is often
added in the milk of ewes, goats, buffalos56 97 99110 and
2.6. Color
in sheeps milk.111114 An optical biosensor (BIACORE
Many food colorants13 are also added to improve the
97 115
3000) tool
is used for the detection of cow milk
appearance and has hazardous effect on health. The anain the milk of ewe and goat. The major advantage of
lytical method called capillary electrophoresis (CE)13 is
this system is that the detection can be obtained within
employed for the separation of food colorants. CE techminutes (>0.1%) and the procedure can be automated.
nique gives a lower sample capacity and optical path. The
A duplex polymerase chain reaction98 is applied for the
detection limit is unsatisfactory.
detection of both cows and goats milk, in goats milk
cheeses using mitochondrial 12S rRNA genes. This duplex
2.7. Preservatives
PCR technique allows the detection of 0.1% of cows milk
Development of micro organism spoils the milk and
in goats milk cheese. Mixtures in milk and milk prodspoiled milk is not good for health. Milk containing
uct can be identified by electrophoretic, chromatographic
bacteria126 converts lactose into lactic acid over the time.
and PCR techniques.105 A qualitative detection of cows
This in turn changes the electrical parameter of the
milk in buffalo milk and cheese109 110 and a quantitative
milk. Conductivity is an easy parameter to detect bacdetermination of fatty acids of authentic buffalos milk,
teria but it is strongly influenced by fat content of the
cows milk and buffalos milk adulterated with cows milk
milk and primarily used for detection of mastitis.127130
is done by gas chromatography.109 ELISA and PCR techFourie et al.131 132 have presented stainless steel rod based
nique are used to determine cows milk in sheeps and goats
impedance probe for bacterial content measurement of
milk.106 110113 116 117 ELISA is widely used immunoassay
milk. The sensor has been integrated with micro controller
Delivered byequipment
Publishing
Technology
to: automatic
IIT Kharagpur
because it reduces the cost of sophisticated
and
circuit for
measurement and data storage.
IP:
203.110.246.25
On:
Tue,
16
Feb
2016
15:31:12
it is easy to use, rapid and readily automated.
KarabiPublishers
et al. have reported a constant phase element
Copyright:
American
Scientific
Bovine milk in ovine and caprine milk118 are detected
(CPE) sensor for detecting bacterial growth in milk.133 The
by reverse-phase high-performance liquid chromatography
bacterial growth changes the ionic property of the medium
and urea-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis.118 But these
hence, the conductivity of the milk changes. Felice et al.
procedures are time consuming, expensive, requiring comhave reported the change of interface capacitance of the
plex pre-treatment of the samples, specialized equipment
sensor with the evaluation of milk bacterial content.134
and qualified personal. TaqMan real-time PCR103 is also
According to the paper, it has shorter threshold detecused to detect bovine milk in ovine and caprine milk.
tion time and can capture bigger growth variations. Jiali
Identification of goat milk adulteration with bovine milk
et al. have reported determination of bacteria counts in
is done by E-tongue119 120 which consists of 36 crossfresh milk in real time using piezoelectric transducer.135
sensibility sensor. The system constitutes of solid state
The detection system consists of cell, oscillator, frequency
potentiometric sensors (polymeric mixtures are applied on
counter and computer where self developed software is
solid conducting silver-epoxy supports) along with the lininstalled to capture the transducer response with the
ear discriminant data analyser.119 121 The advantage of this
change of culture media during bacteria growth. The transmethodology is that it is fast and have lower calibration
ducer could acquire sufficient data rapidly and enabled
cost, satisfactory accuracy and easy adaptability to differreal-time monitoring of bacteria growth.
ent working condition. Mixture of bovine milk in water
Bishop et al.136 have described an impedimetric method
buffalo milk122 is detected by HPLC method. Sandwich
to determine the shelf-life of pasteurized whole milk. They
IgG ELISA99 method is used to detect goat, sheep and
have considered 100 samples of pasteurized whole milk
buffalo milk cheese, mixed with bovine milk from cheaper
and studied different parameters such as organoleptic evalsources. This assay is more sensitive than other competiuation, standard plate count (SPC), psychrotrophic bactetive assay. Detection limits in milk were 0.001% cows milk
ria count (PBC), modified psychrotrophic bacteria count
adulteration of sheep or buffalo milk; and 0.01% cows
(mPBC), moseley test (MSPC), and impedance detection
milk adulteration of goat milk.
time (IDT) at 18 and 21 degrees centigrade. The correlations between the shelf life and the direct count meth2.5. Milk Powder
ods are not adequate to make any prediction. Moseley test
(MSPC) apart form impedance method possess significant
Sometimes milk powder as an adulterant is added in fresh
relationships to shelf-life. And it has been claimed that
milk,123 124 this is done for economic advantage when a
8
Das et al.
REVIEW
impedance method has advantages over the Moseley test as

acid in milk, which is required by growing babies. Such
it is better predictor of shelf-life, it is less labour intensive.
artificial milk is harmful for all, but is more dangerous for
So to increase the shelf life, addition of chemipregnant women. As a substitute of milk fat, refined oil is
cal preservatives in branded milk23 is a very common
mixed; and to dissolve the oil in water and to give a frothy
practice.134 Sometimes hydrogenperoxide (H2 O2 is used
solution, detergents are used. This mixture is so expertly
as a preservative120 and E-Tongue is used120 to detect H2 O2
prepared that the specific gravity of the synthetic milk is
and fat content of the milk. Thiago et al.120 have reported
the same as natural milk. The detection method used to
the manufacturing of the sensors array using film of prusdetect synthetic milk is mainly carried out by measuring
sian blue (PB) and each sensor consists of a disposable
the conductivity or pH.5
As the synthetic milk is prepared by mixing of different
integrated electrodes. The sensing mode is voltametric, in
reagents,89 139 it is difficult for the detection of adulterants
which current is measured by varying the potential. The
by a single method. The detection technique requires more
data obtained from cyclic voltammograms were recorded
than two methods to confirm the presence of adulterants.
by using this integrated sensor and analysed using nonsupervised technique such as principal component analysis
(PCA). The integration of electrodes is advantageous as
2.9. Urea
they can operate in a simpler way and can be miniaturised.
The common milk adulterant3 17 18 89 140142 to increase the
Other preservatives or neutraliser to prevent curdling used
shelf life is addition of urea to milk. Urea is also used to
in many brands of milk are sodium carbonate (Na2 CO3 ,
prepare synthetic milk and increase the SNF value. Urea
sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3 and formalin (HCHO).
content in milk may also increase due to unbalanced feedMohanan et al. have reported the study of thermoacoustic
ing of cows.141 142 Unbalanced urea content in milk influanalysis to identify the chemicals.23 In this method, the
ences milk production and fertility141 143 144 of lactating
density and ultrasonic velocity are determined for different
dairy cows. It is also used for heat stability.145 Health hazsamples while the temperature is kept fixed for a particards associated are acidity, indigestion, ulcers and cancers.
ular measurement. Ultrasonic velocities are measured by
Urea is harmful to heart, liver and kidneys;3 especially for
a single crystal ultrasonic interferometer at a frequency of
kidneys as the kidneys have to do more work to remove
2 MHz. Parameter called Raos specific sound velocity has
urea from the body.146 This necessitates the importance of
been derived from the ultrasonic
velocity
and
the
density.
detectionto:ofIIT
urea
in milk.
Kharagpur
The Raos parameter changes with
change of the chemPotentiometric
biosensor is a common method to detect
IP:the
203.110.246.25
On: Tue, 16
Feb 2016 15:31:12
ical additives. Boric acid, formalin, sodium
azideAmerican
are old Scientific
Copyright:
urea. ThePublishers
urease hydrolyzes the urea present in the sample
adulterants used as milk preservative.21 22 It can preserve
and NH+
4 ion is released which causes to develop potenthe milk for long time and has poisonous effect which
tial across the potentiometric transducers.3 142 Trivedi et al.
can lead to death.137 It develops abdominal pain, diarrhea,
have reported a potentiometric biosensor3 to detect urea
vomiting and other poison related symptoms. Rosalic acid
adulteration in milk. It uses a NH+
4 ion sensitive electrode
test is a common test to detect sodium carbonate/sodium
as the transducer, which is a disposable type urea senbicarbonate and formalin in milk.138
sitive enzymatic biosensor system. The sensor exhibits a
Pesticides are also used in milk to kill the microorgandetection limit of 2.5 105 mol/L. The drawback of NH+
4
isms present and to resist its further growth or in otherbased urea sensor is that presence of other cation influwords it is used to preserve milk. Their presence in milk
ences the measurement. Ammonium sensitive electrodes
poses serious health hazards due to its toxicity or carare used to detect presence of urea in milk. Number of
cinogenicity. Pesticides present in milk can be detected by
ammonium ion produced depends on the quantity of urea
mass spectrometry.31
which is then converted to ammonium gas. The electrode
detects ammonium gas and converts to voltage. A linear
2.8. Neutralizers
logarithmic relationship is being noted between the concentration of urea and the output voltage.141 This method
As mentioned earlier, that neutralizers like hydrated lime,
sodium hydroxide, sodium carbonate or sodium bicarbonhas the advantage that it is simple and a large number of
ate are added in milk which are generally prohibited.
samples can be handled within a short span of time.
NaOH is often used in synthetic milk to neutralize the
A very new and easy method for detecting melamine
acidic effect.11 15 89 Person develops impaired respiratory
and urea adulteration in milk is performed by cyclic
voltammetry147 experiments with a Au working electrode
function or cancer due to the consumption of milk contaminated with NaOH. Synthetic milk is a common probfollowed by f-PCA data analysis and KNN classification.
lem in India which is prepared by adding urea, caustic
This method has the advantage that it is simple, rapid and
soda, refined oil and common detergents. Caustic soda
inexpensive method.
which contains sodium, acts as slow poison for those sufMeasurement of change of pH18 141 148 is another
fering from hypertension and heart ailments. Caustic soda
method of urea detection in milk. Two methods are gendeprives the body from utilizing lysine, an essential amino
erally reported to measure the change of pH. In the first
REVIEW
Das et al.
method, enzymatic catalysis reaction takes place in the

2.10. Whey/Liquid whey
presence of urease. The reaction produces ammonium ions
Addition of liquid-whey (liquid by product of cottage
which changes the pH value of the solution. The change
cheese) is a very common practice to increase the volume
is detected by pH indicator (cresol red). The change in
of milk; especially in the locality where huge amount of
absorbance of the dye recorded by the UV/VIS speccottage cheese is prepared every day. As mentioned earlier
that the advantage is that it does not change the lactose
trophotometer is proportional to the urea concentration
content of the milk. Milk is also reconstructed from whey
present in the dialysate. The second one is a differenby dissolving whey powder in aqueous medium containing
tial pH method for the routine determination of urea in
calcium sequestering agent and carrageenan components.
milk. The measurement is based upon a single enzymatic
Sometimes lactose is added to reduce the amount of whey
reaction, the urea hydrolysis by urease, which causes a
powder. The reconstruction is performed essentially for its
pH variation and directly proportional to the urea conlow cost. Apart from the economic loss of the consumers
tent in the milk sample. This method is very simple,
if sanitary regulation to prepare whey/whey powder is not
accurate and rapid. A durable NH+
sensitive
CHEM4
maintained it may cause serious health hazards.
FET based sensor149 is developed which shows good senLow priced rennet whey is sometimes mixed with liquid
sitivity in detecting urea in milk. A pH sensitive field
milk and milk powder.124 Whey,14 15 158 159 rennet whey
effect transistor150 is used to detect urea in milk which
solid are often found in milk.124 Addition of rennet whey
is based on penicillin enzyme electrode by immobilizing
solid in UHT milk causes lowering of blood pressure.
penicillinase over a pH glass electrode. In these probes
Presence of rennet whey in milk and milk products can
penicillinase catalyzes the hydrolysis of penicillin to penibe
detected by reverse phase HPLC160 method. In this
cilloic acid. Penicilloic acid is a strong acid which releases
method,
the constituents of the adulterated milk are sepaprotons and depresses the pH at the surface of the pH
rated
according
to their physical properties (size) or chemelectrode. This change of pH indicates the presence of
ical
properties
(ionic
strength, cation-anion exchange, ion
urea.
pairing
etc.).
Then
the
constituents are identified with the
Urea is also detected by the measurement of carbon
help
of
photo
detectors
on the basis of UV absorbance,
141 151153
dioxide partial pressure by manometric biosensor.
chemiluminescence or fluorescence properties. To detect
In this method, the hydrolysis of urea with urease releases
the fraudulent addition of rennet (enzymes for curdling of
ammonium and carbonate ions.Delivered
These ionsbyare
enclosed in
Publishing
Technology
to: IIT
Kharagpur
milk) whey
solid
in UHT milk,124 capillary electrophorea sealed cell with citric acid which
forms carbon dioxide
IP: 203.110.246.25
On: Tue,sis
16isFeb
2016
15:31:12
used. In capillary electrophoresis, casein and whey
Copyright:
American
from the solution. This creates a change
in pressure
in the Scientific Publishers
are separated using centrifuge. Presence of foreign pepcell, and can be measured by manometric sensor to give
tide is detected by analyzing casein macro peptide of
the urea concentration in the sample. The sensitivity of
different samples. In this method, the only interference
the biosensor will be increased with temperature due to an
observed is due to the degradation of protein at very high
increase in gas pressure. The assay is inexpensive, simple,
temperature or after very long storage periods. ELISA161
accurate and robust.
is used for the detection of bovine rennet whey (BRW)
The methods for estimation of urea in milk are derived
solids in skim milk powders (SMP) and buttermilk powfrom the reaction of urea with p-dimethyle amino benders. It is an immunological technique that involves an
zaldehyde or diacetyl monoxime141 154 and also measured
enzyme to detect the presence of an antibody or an antigen
by ion selective electrode.141 142 Urea is also detected by
in a sample. ELISA uses a monoclonal antibody develcalorimetric method.155 It can be detected from the characoped against bovine k-casein which recognizes caseinoteristics absorption bands of amide bond of urea in infrared
macropeptide (CMP) of bovine whey. The assay has a limit
region.156 157 The detection of urea in milk is done by
of detection of 0.1% (W/W) BRW powder in SMP and
using a piezo-electric sensor,17 which measures the preshas high repeatability and reliability.
sure of the gas evolved in the sample and surface acoustic
Sometimes fourth derivative spectroscopy162 is used to
wave (SAW) transducers to detect the change in oscilladetect whey protein in total protein of milk. In this method,
tion frequency after adsorption or desorption of molecules
the ratio of casein to whey is the determining factor. The
from the surface of quartz crystals.
peaks of the UV spectra determine the ratio. Detection of
Optical biosensors are also used to detect urea in milk.
whey in milk can be done by blot immunoassay163 method.
It measures electromagnetic radiations absorbed or emitted
In this method, the natural and foreign protein are identiby either reactants or products of the biological system.
fied with the help of gel electrophoresis and detected using
Thermoelectric biosensors are sometimes used to detect
specific antibodies. The assay used in this method is rapid,
the change in temperature accompanied by a biochemical
sensitive and can detect 0.001% (W/V) glycomacropeptide
reaction. In the above mentioned biosensors3 17 to detect
(GMP), 0.5% (V/V) liquid cheese whey and 0.01% W/V
urea in milk, have very short detection limit and low operdehydrated cheese whey. Another whey detection method
ational stability. Hence, these types of biosensors are unfit
is by phosphor partition.158 The whey addition causes diffor routine analysis.
ferent phosphor and nitrogen count. The milk is defatted
10
Das et al.
Table I. Different milk adulterants and the method used to detect those adulterants.
Adulterants
Methods
References
Sequential injection analysis

Flow injection analysis
Potentiometric detection
Conductometric sequential injection analysis
Antibiotics
Electrical conductivity
BRT Test
Spot Test
SNAP test and LACTEK test
Chromatography (HPLC)
Liquid chromatography mass spectrometry
Somatic cell count (SCC)
Screening test
Biosensor assay based on surface plasmon resonance (SPR)
E-Nose
[4853]
[74]
[78]
[79]
[4, 70, 80]
[69, 71]
[81, 82]
[83]
[54]
[84]
Non-milk protiens
Fluorescence spectroscopy
Analysis of triacylglycerols using gas liquid
Chromatography NIR spectroscopy
Electrical conductivity and capacitive reactance
Reversed Phase HPLC method in combination with fluorescence detector
Sulfate capillary electrophoresis and chromarography
E-nose
[88]
[91]
[92]
[93]
[94]
[86]
[38, 39, 96]
Low-valued milk
Optical biosensor (BIACORE 3000) tool

Duplex polymerase chain reaction
Electrophoretic, chromatographic and PCR techniques
Gas chromatography
ELISA and PCR techniques
Reverse-phase high performance liquid chromatography and
urea-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis
Delivered
TaqMan
real time by
PCRPublishing Technology to: IIT Kharagpur
IP: 203.110.246.25 On: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:31:12
E-tongue
HPLC method
Sandwich IgG ELISA
[97, 115]
[98]
[105]
[109]
[106, 110113, 116, 117]
[118]
FAST (Fluorescence of advanced maillard products and soluble tryptophan)
[125]
Milk powder
[12]
[43]
[44, 45]
[46, 47]
[103]
[119, 120]
[122]
[99]
Color
Capillary electrophoresis
[13]
Preservatives
Conductivity
Impedance
Capacitance
Piezoelectric transducer
Impedimetric
E-Tongue
Thermoacoustic analysis
Rosalic acid test
[127130]
[133]
[134]
[135]
[136]
[120]
[23]
[138]
Neutralizers
Conductivity or pH measurement
Urea
Potentiometric biosensor
pH measurement
Durable NH+4 sensitive CHEMFET based sensor
pH sensitive field effect transistor
Manometric biosensor
Ion selective electrode
Calorimetric method
Biosensors
Whey/Liquid whey
Reverse phase HPLC method

Capillary Electrophoresis
ELISA
Fourth derivative spectroscopy
Blot immunoassay method
Phosphor partition
NIR spectroscopy
Immunochromatographic assay
[5]
[3, 142]
[18, 141, 148]
[149]
[150]
[141, 151153]
[141, 142]
[155]
[3, 17]
[160]
[124]
[161]
[162]
[163]
[158]
[15]
[164]
11
REVIEW
Chlorine
Das et al.
Table I. Continued.
Adulterants
REVIEW
Water
Methods
References
Frequency admittance measurements

E-nose
Electrical conductivity
Ultrasonic transmitter receiver system
NIR measurement
Freezing point osmometry and freezing point cryoscopic method
[166]
[40]
[165, 168, 170]
[171]
[15]
[166, 167]
by centrifuge and then amount of phosphor and nitrogen

are determined. The amount of adulteration is determined
by the phosphor count. Whey in milk is also detected by
NIR spectroscopy.15 The detection method is similar to
the detection of water in milk. Whey adulteration detection is also done by immunochromatographic assay.164 The
method used in this assay is very simple to handle, give
good accuracy and precision. These instrumental method
of analysis yield high accuracy of detection but they suffer from some distinctive shortcomings as the methods are
time consuming and expensive; and require elaborate sample preparation and expert manpower.
mixed in milk. When the milk is adulterated with water,

quantity of ions decreases so the resistance is higher and
the EC is changed.165 168 170 The electrical conductivity
method used for detection of water165 is rapid. The drawback of this instrumentation system168 is that it is neither
precise nor sensitive. But the technique used in this measurement is simple and inexpensive. Anwar et al. have
reported an ultrasonic transmitter receiver system to detect
the amount of adulteration in full cream milk with water.
The acoustic wave passing through the milk sample gets
attenuated. The level of attenuation varies with the amount
of adulteration.171 This method is easy and can detect adulteration of full cream milk by water quickly.
Water and whey adulterant in milk15 are detected by
2.11. Water
NIRS. This method gives different peaks for different
Water
is
the
most
common
adulterant
in
samples when NIR measurement is performed using the
15 40 131 165169
Though major percentage of natural
milk.
reflectance mode in the region of 11002500 nm. The
milk contains water, but milk with added water is a
NIR spectra in the region of 11002500 nm are collected
serious concern to the milk consuming
community.
In one
Delivered
by Publishing
Technology to: IIT Kharagpur
for different samples of water-adulterated milk and then
203.110.246.25
hand it decreases the nutritiousIP:
value;
on the other On:
handTue, 16 Feb 2016 15:31:12
classifiedPublishers
by using discriminant algorithm. It is a nonCopyright:
American
Scientific
chemicals are added to compensate the density and color
destructive technique and able to determine several compoafter dilution with water. Since addition of water is the
nents in milk at once. The other methods used to determine
easiest way of adulteration of milk, so a variety of techthe additional water content in milk are freezing point
niques are also available for its detection. Water content
osmometry167 and freezing point cryoscopic method.166 In
in milk is measured by hydrogen ion concentration which
both the techniques, detection is based on the principle that
is based on the principle that milk with added water will
diluted with more water the milk freezes quickly and gives
11
become less acidic. Detection of water content in milk
different readings at the output. However, these measure166
can be done by fequency admittance measurements.
ment techniques are expensive, time consuming and may
In this method, two L shaped electrodes with dimension
not yield accurate detection results.
of 15 mm 6 mm with a separation of 1 mm are used
Table I gives different milk adulterants, methodologies
as sensing element. The measurement of conductance at
adopted
to adulterate the milk and the references.
8 C is carried out above frequency of 100 kHz. The conductance decreases approximately linearly with increasing
3. ELECTRICAL METHODS TO DETECT
water content. Spreeta sensor is used for detecting water
MILK ADULTERANTS
in milk.56 Spreeta is a prototype biosensor where the
In these section different electrical methods to detect milk
refractive index of the sample under test indicates the
adulteration is summarized. Electrical methods are comaddition of water content in milk. It is a robust analytical
paratively simpler than other methods and easy to process
tool for the automated immunochemical detection of
as the signal is in electrical domain. The other advantages
different adulterants and contaminants in milk. The cost
are, the measurement and data storage can be automated
of the instrument is very high. E nose is also used for
and the equipment can be made portable for field use.
detecting water adulteration in milk.40 Metal oxide sensor
array is used to detect the aroma of milk adulterated with
3.1. Potentiometric Sensors
different percentage of water. Discriminant algorithms
such as PCA or LDA are generally used along with this
Potentiometry allows the determination of a wide spectype of sensor to distinguish between different samples.
trum of ions and inexpensive, portable equipment can
The most common technique is electrical conductivbe developed. Trivedi et al. has reported a potentiometric biosensor3 to detect urea adulteration in milk. It uses
ity (EC) which is used to detect the volume of water
12
Das et al.
3.2. Conductance Measurement

The conductance measurement between two electrodes is
a well known technique to detect adulteration. Most of
the times the electrical equivalent model of the electrodes
immersed in the sample is evaluated to identify the adulterated milk.5 172175
Anwar et al. has reported a pair of individual platinum
electrodes along with a temperature unit for cyclic cooling
to measure the ac conductance of milk adulterated with
synthetic milk. Siuli et al.172 174 175 used a constant phase
element and evaluated its electrical equivalent circuit using
LEVMW software;176 where the change in the parameters
of the electrical equivalent circuit reflects different kinds
of adulteration.
the chemical additives. Anwar et al. has reported an ultrasonic

transmitter receiver system to detect milk adulteration. The
acoustic wave passing through the milk sample gets attenuated. The level of attenuation varies with the amount of
adulteration.171
3.4. E-Nose
There has been extensive research in evaluating electronic
noses for monitoring the quality of milk. The two main
components of an electronic nose (E-nose) are the sensing
system and the automated pattern recognition system.33 40
The common pattern recognition systems are either principal component Analysis (PCA), linear discriminant analysis (LDA) or Artificial Neural Network (ANN). Yu et al.40
reported an E-nose containing ten different metal oxide
13
REVIEW
a NH+
Lawton et al. has reported to determine the fat content of
4 ion sensitive electrode as the transducer. It is a
the milk by measuring electrical conductivity and capacidisposable type urea sensitive enzymatic biosensor systive reactance of milk.93 Measurement was carried out at
tem and has been developed by immobilizing the urease
100 kHz to avoid electrode polarization. The measurement
enzyme, through entrapping, onto the ion sensitive memrequires careful temperature control.
brane using a polymer matrix. The sensor exhibited a
Mabrook et al. has reported detection of water condetection limit of 2.5 105 mol/L.
tent in milk by frequency admittance measurements.166
Conzuelo et al. has reported an amperometric biosenIn this method, two L shaped electrodes with dimension
sors to detect the lactose content of milk. Often lactose
of 15 mm 6 mm with a separation of 1 mm are used
concentration is used as a basic marker for the evaluation
as sensing element. The measurement of conductance at
of milk quality and the detection of abnormalities. It has
8 C is carried out above frequency of 100 kHz. The conbeen found that milk from cows suffering mastitis has
ductance decreases approximately linearly with increasing
low lactose levels. Enzyme-based amperometric biosenwater content.
sors is a versatile analytical devices with high selectivity
37
and can be operated by unskilled personnel. The bio3.2.1. Mastitis Detection by Electrical
electrode is designed using self assembled monolayer, a
Conductivity Method
specific enzyme to give reaction with the lactose and other
Mastitis
causes increased conductivity. This is due to
chemicals. The enzyme reaction gives rise to an amperincreased
Sodium and Chloride ions in milk which in turn
ometric signal proportional to the lactose concentration.
gives
the
change
in the conductivity measurement and is
Renny et al. has reported a piezo-electric sensor to detect
an
well
known
method
to detect mastitis in milk.4853 170
17
the urea content in milk. It is an enzyme based senFernando et al. has reported that the accuracy of electrisor and detects pressure of the gas, evolved in the sample
cal conductivity detection of sub clinical mastitis is better
when the reaction takes place in the presence of urease.
than all other indirect methods. Moreover the adaptability
Potentiometric electronic tongues using lipid/polymer
of this measurement is more in both manual and automatic
membranes has the ability to classify vast kinds of chemicow-side mastitis detection systems.50
cal substances into several groups, which can be found in
the taste reception in biological systems.41 Mirjana et al.
3.3. Ultrasonic Detectors
Publishing
have reported a potentiometric Delivered
electronic by
tongue
to detectTechnology to: IIT Kharagpur
brands
milk contain chemical additives such
IP: 203.110.246.25
On: Tue,Many
16 Feb
2016of
15:31:12
electronic tongue
the quality of milk.42 The potentiometric
Copyright: American Scientific
Publishers
as
sodium
carbonate
(Na2 CO3 ), sodium bicarbonate
reported by them includes the automatic sampling system,
(NaHCO3 ), formalin (HCHO) etc. These chemicals are added
the sensor array with the reference electrode, the signal
to milk to preserve it for longer time or as a neutraliser to
processing unit and a personal computer with the required
prevent curdling. Mohanan et al. has reported the study of
software (Astree 3.0.1.) installed. The sensor array consist
thermoacoustic analysis to identify the chemicals.23 In this
of seven sensors coated with lipid/polymer material and
method, the density and ultrasonic velocity are determined
Ag/AgCl electrode was used as reference. The potential
for different samples while the temperature is kept fixed for
is generated by the interaction of compounds in the sama particular measurement. Ultrasonic velocities were meaple and the sensitive coating of sensors. The data obtained
sured by a single crystal ultrasonic interferometer at a frefrom the electronic tongue is processed by principal comquency of 2 MHz. Parameter called Raos specific sound
ponents analysis (PCA) to get the variance in the experivelocity (r) has been derived from the ultrasonic velocity and
mental data.
the density. The Raos parameter changes with the change of
Das et al.
REVIEW
semiconductor sensors which can monitor the adulteration

of milk by water. Benedetti et al.84 studied the detection
of Aflatoxin M1 content in milk by E-Nose system containing 12 metal oxide semiconductors (MOS) sensors and
12 MOSFETs. It has been claimed that the E-nose classification was in complete agreement with Aflatoxin M1
content measured by an ELISA procedure.
E-noses can monitor the aging of milk and can detect
milk volatile compounds.38 39 Capone et al. have used an
E-nose to measure the development of rancidity in UHT
and pasteurized milk during 8 and 3 days with five different SnO2 thin films, prepared using solgel technology.
The claim is, the sensors could distinguish between both
types of milk as well as determine the degree of rancidity
of milks. Similar results have been reported by Labreche
et al.96 with an E-nose containing 18 MOS sensors.
of the milk. Conductivity is an easy parameter to detect

bacteria but it is strongly infiuenced by fat content of the
milk and primarily used for detection of mastitis.127 128
Fourie et al.131 132 has presented stainless steel rod based
impedance probe for bacterial content measurement of
milk. It has been described that the probe must be thoroughly cleaned after testing and the measurement is
dominated by the impedance of the electrode-electrolyte
interface. The stainless steel rod has the advantage of
cleaning over copper and brass probes. The sensor has
been integrated with microcontroller circuit for automatic
measurement and data storage.
Bishop et al.136 have described a impedimetric method
to determine the shelf-life of pasteurized whole milk. They
have considered 100 samples of pasteurized whole milk
and studied different parameters such as organoleptic evaluation, standard plate count (SPC), psychrotrophic bacte3.5. E-Tongue
ria count (PBC), modified psychrotrophic bacteria count
(mPBC), Moseley test (MSPC), and impedance detection
Electronic tongues or test sensors has become an interesttime (IDT) at 18 and 21 degrees centigrade. The correing tool to detect milk adulteration.119121 It collects inforlation between the shelf life and the direct count methmation by an array of sensor and can classify the milk
ods are not adequate to make any prediction. Moseley test
providing the information whether it is consumable or not.
(MSPC) apart from impedance method possesses signifElectronic tongues can be of potentiometric or voltametric.
icant relationships to shelf-life. And it has been claimed
Thiago et al.120 have reported the manufacturing of the
sensors of the array using film of Prussian Blue (PB).
that impedance method has advantages over the Moseley
The sensing mode is voltametric in which current is meatest as it is better predictor of shelf-life, it is less labor
sured by varying the potential. The E-tongue has been used
intensive, and requires only 12 days, as opposed to
Delivered by Publishing Technology to: IIT Kharagpur
to detect hydrogen peroxide and
fat
content
of
the
milk.
days 2016
to complete.
IP: 203.110.246.25 On: Tue,79
16 Feb
15:31:12
Dias et al. and laura et al. have reported
an electronic
KarabiPublishers
et al. has reported a constant phase element
Copyright:
American Scientific
tongue with 36 cross-sensibility sensor to detect goat milk
(CPE) sensor for detecting bacterial growth in milk.133 The
adulteration with bovine milk. The system constitutes of
bacterial growth changes the ionic property of the medium
solid state potentiometric sensors (polymeric mixtures are
hence, the conductivity of the milk changes. A constant
applied on solid conducting silver-epoxy supports) along
phase element (CPE) based sensor also has been reported
with the linear discriminant data analyser.119 121
by the authors to detect milk adulteration.172 174 175 177 178
A CPE essentially has the impedance whose phase angle
3.6. Capacitance Growth Curve to Detect the
remains constant over a wide range of frequencies. It has
Development of Micro Organism in Raw Milk
been observed that the constant phase angle (CPA) changes
with the change of physical property of the medium
Felice et al. has reported the change of interface capaci(e.g., ionic concentration). And this property of the CPE
tance of the sensor with the evaluation of milk bacterial
can be used for sensing purpose. This means the phase
content.134 According to the paper it has shorter detection
angle of the CPE will be different for pure milk and the
time and can capture bigger growth variations.
3.7. Piezoelectric Sensor
Jiali et al. has reported determination of bacteria counts
in fresh milk in real time using piezoelectric transducer.135
The detection system consists of cell for detection, oscillator, frequency counter and computer where self developed
software is installed to capture the transducer response
with the change of culture media during bacteria growth.
The transducer could acquire sufficient data rapidly and
enabled real-time monitoring of bacteria growth.
3.8. Impedance Probe
Milk containing bacteria convert lactose into lactic acid
over the time. This in turn changes the electrical parameter
14
Table II.
Different electrical methods to detect milk adulteration.
Electrical methods
References
Potentiometric
Conductance
measurement
Conductivity
Ultrasonic
E-nose
E-tongue
Capacitance growth
Piezoelectric sensor
Impedance probe
[3, 17, 37, 41, 42]

[5, 93, 166, 172176]
[4850, 5053, 170]
[23, 171]
[33, 3840, 84, 96]
[119121]
[134]
[135]
[127, 128, 131133, 136, 172,
174, 175, 177, 178]
Das et al.
milk with different ionic concentration or with some impurity. An electronic circuit will measure the phase angle
change and give the output in electrical signal.
Table II gives brief information about different electrical
methods can be used to detect milk adulteration along with
their references.
4. CONCLUSION
Gas liquid chromatography

Glycomacropeptide
High performance liquid chromatography
Impedance detection time
Liquid chromatography
Least-squares support vector machine
Linear discriminant analysis
Milk fat
Mid-Infrared spectroscopy
Mass spectroscopy
Metal oxide semiconductor
Moseley test
Near-Infrared spectroscopy
Nuclear magnetic resonance
Polymerase chain reaction
Partially hydrogenated vegetable oil
Principal component analysis
Prussian blue
Psychrotrophic bacteria count.
Adulteration in milk is normally present in its most crude

form. Prohibited substances are often added or sometimes
the milk is totally substituted by synthetic milk. This is
done for financial gain. But many times carelessness and
lack of hygienic condition of processing, storing, transportation and marketing causes adulteration. Such types
of adulteration are quite common in developing countries
or backward countries. But milk adulteration is a serious
concern in developed countries also. In these countries
advanced methods are adopted to adulterate milk and need
sophisticated methods for detection.
Consumers are either cheated or often become victim of
Acknowledgments: The authors are thankful to UGCdiseases by consuming adulterated milk. Quality control
DAE Consortium for Scientific Research, Kolkata, India
tests for milk are a considerable aspect to assure adulterand also to PURSE project, JU. Authors would like to
ant free milk for consumption. Hypertension, renal disacknowledge WBDST sponsored project for providing
eases, skin, eye, heart problem and cancer are some of the
financial assistance.
common disease caused by consuming adulterated milk.
Hundreds of different techniques are adopted to adulterate
milk. And the detection technique
comprises
from sim-Technology to: IIT Kharagpur
Delivered
by Publishing
References
and Notes
203.110.246.25
Feb 2016 15:31:12
ple visual inspection to complexIP:
biological
systems. On:
ThisTue, 16
1. J. G. Hattersley, The Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine 15, 89
Copyright:
American
Scientific
Publishers
paper gives an overview of the different elements used
(2000).
to adulterate milk, the methodology to adulterate and an
2. R. E. Baynes, R. Lyman, K. L. Anderson, and C. F. Brownie,
J. Food Prot. 62, 177 (1999).
elaborate study on electrical methods adopted to adulterate
3. U. B. Trivedi, D. Lakshminarayana, I. L. Kothari, N. G. Patel, H. N.
milk. It is expected that the paper will help the researchers
Kapse, K. K. Makhija, P. B. Patel, and C. J. Panchal, Sensors and
to get an overall idea of the milk adulteration and their
Actuators B: Chemical 140, 260 (2009).
detection techniques.
4. R. G. Tolentino, M. N. Perez, G. D. Gonzalez, S. V. Y. Leon, M. G.
Nomenclature
AFMI Aflatoxin M1
ANN Artificial neural network
BRW Bovine rennet whey
CE Capillary electrophoresis
CMP Casein Macropeptide
CPA Constant phase angle
CPE Constant phase element
CNLS Complex nonlinear least square
DCE Distributed circuit element
ELISA Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
EIS Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy
EC Electrical conductivity
FDA Food and drug administration
FAST Flourance of advanced maillard products and
soluble tryptophan
FOE Fractional order element
FIA Flow injection analysis
FQF Fit quality factor
GC Gas chromatography
Lopez, and G. P. Flores, Interciencia 30, 291 (2005).

5. A. Sadat, P. Mustajab, and I. A. Khan, J. Food Eng. 77, 472 (2006).
6. M. Payne, C. M. Bruhn, B. Reed, A. Scearce, and J. O. Donnell,
J. Dairy Sci. 82, 2224 (1999).
7. X. Tan, Y. Wen Jiang, Y. Jun Huang, and S. Hua Hu, J. Zhejiang
Univ. Sci. B 10, 280 (2009).
8. X. Tan, Y. Jun Huang, Y.-W. Jiang, and S. Hua Hu, Vetenary
Research 161, 585 (2007).
9. J. A. Galloway, The Lancet 355, 323 (2000).
10. H. Gem, The Lancet 69, 156 (1857).
11. J. C. Baker and L. L. V. Slyke, The Journal of Biological Chemistry
357 (1919).
12. M. J. R. Lima, S. M. V. Fernandes, and A. O. S. S. Rangel, Food
Control 15, 609 (2004).
13. H.-Y. Huang, Y.-C. Shih, and Y.-C. Chen, J. Chromatogr. A
959, 317 (2002).
14. F. Harding, (ed.), Adulteration of Milk, Chapmann and Hall, New
York (1999).
15. S. Kasemsumran, W. Thanapase, and A. Kiatsoonthon, Anal. Sci.
23, 907 (2007).
16. P. Bansal and N. Bansal, Current Science 73, 904 (1997).
17. E. F. Renny, D. K. Daniel, A. I. Krastanov, C. A. Zachariah, and
R. Elizabeth, Biotechnol. Biotechnol. Equip. 19, 198 (2005).
18. M. Singh, N. Verma, A. K. Garg, and N. Redhu, Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 134, 345 (2008).
15
REVIEW
GLC
GMP
HPLC
IDT
LC
LS-SVM
LDA
MF
MIR
MS
MOS
MSPC
NIR
NMR
PCR
PHVO
PCA
PB
PBC
REVIEW
Das et al.
19. A. Kaura, Synthetic Milk-White Poison, Technical Report the Tri55. M. P. Molina, R. L. Althaus, A. Molina, and N. Fernandez, Interbune, Chandigarh, India (2005).
national Dairy Journal 13, 821 (2003).
20. M. M. Paradkar, R. S. Singhal, and P. R. Kulkarni, International
56. W. Haasnoot, G. R. Marchesini, and K. Koopal, J. AOAC Int.
Dairy Journal 53, 92 (2000).
89, 849 (2006).
21. M. M. Hewedy and C. J. Smith, Food Hydrocolloids 3, 399 (1989).
57. G. O. Aboge, E. K. Kangethe, S. M. Arimi, A. O. Omore,
22. S. Rideal and A. G. R. Foulerton, Public Health 11, 554
J. J. McDermott, L. W. Kanja, J. K. Macharia, J. G. Nduhiu,
(18981899).
and A. Githua, 3rd All Africa Conference on Animal Agriculture,
23. S. Mohanan, P. G. T. Panicker, L. Iype, M. Laila, I. Domini, and
Alexandria, Egypt (2000), Vol. 6.
R. G. Bindu, Pramana Journal of Physics 59, 525 (2002).
58. H. Alomirah, H. Al-Mazeedi, S. Al-Zenki, T. Al-Aati, J. Al-Otaibi,
24. W. A. Moats, Journal of Food Protection 51, 491 (1988).
M. Al-Batel, and J. Sidhu, Journal of Food Quality 30, 745 (2007).
25. M. Lipp, Food chemistry 54, 213 (1995).
59. D. Sierra, A. Sanchez, A. Contreras, C. Luengo, J. C. Corrales,
26. R. Karoui and J. D. Baerdemaeker, Food Chemistry 102, 621
C. T. Morales, C. de la Fe, I. Guirao, and C. Gonzalo, J. Dairy Sci.
(2007).
92, 3585 (2009).
27. H. Huang, H. Yu, H. Xu, and Y. Ying, Journal of Food Engineering
60. H. Meilina, S. Kuroki, B. M. Jinendra, K. Ikuta, and R. Tsenkova,
87, 303 (2008).
Biosystems Engineering 104, 243 (2009).
28. B. J. Kitchen, J. Dairy. Res. 48, 167 (1981).
61. T. Mottam, A. Rudnitskaya, A. Legin, L. J. Fitzpatrick, and P. D.
29. A. R. Nisha, Veterinary World 1, 375 (2008).
Eckersall, Biosens. Bioelectron. 22, 2689 (2007).
30. J. R. Bishop and C. H. White, Journal of Food Protection 47, 647
62. S. R. Raz, M. G. E. G. Bremer, M. Giesbers, and W. Norde,
(1984).
Biosens. Bioelectron. 24, 552 (2008).
31. M. Careri, F. Bianchi, and C. Corradini, J. Chromatogr. A 970, 3
63. F. J. Schenck and P. S. Callery, J. Chromatogr. A 812, 99 (1998).
(2002).
64. A. Sternesjo, C. Mellgren, and L. Bjorck, Anal. Biochem. 226, 175
32. H. Kataoka, H. L. Lord, and J. Pawliszyn, J. Chromatogr. A 880, 35
(1995).
(2000).
65. V. Gaudin and M. L. Pavy, Journal of the Association of Official
33. A. Berna, Sensors 10, 3882 (2010).
Analytical Chemists 82, 1316 (1999).
34. A. Afzal, M. Mahmood, L. Hussain, and M. Akhtar, Pakistan Jour66. V. Gaudin and P. Maris, Food and Agricultural Immunology 13, 77
nal of Nutrition 12, 1195 (2011).
(2001).
35. M. Kartheek, A. A. Smith, A. K. Muthu, and R. Manavalan, Jour67. S. Rastogi, P. D. Dwivedi, S. K. Khanna, and M. Das, Food Control
nal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research 3, 629 (2011).
15, 287 (2004).
36. A. Borin, M. F. Ferrao, C. Mello, D. A. Maretto, and R. J. Poppi,
68. S. A. Mcewen, A. H. Meek, and W. D. Black, J. Food Prot. 54, 454
Analytica Chimica Acta 579, 25 (2006).
(1991).
37. F. Conzuelo, M. Gamella, S. Campuzano, M. A. Ruiz, A. J.
69. S. Ghidini, E. Zanardi, G. Varisco, and R. Chizzolini, Food Addit.
Reviejo, and J. M. Pingarron, Journal of Agriculture and Food
Contam. 20, 528 (2003).
Chemistry 58, 7141 (2010).
70. M. Khaskheli,
R. S. Malik, M. A. Arain, A. H. Soomro, and H. H.
to: IIT Kharagpur
38. S. Capone, P. Siciliano, F. Quaranta,
R. Rella, M. Epifani,
andTue, 16 Feb
Arain,2016
Pakistan
Journal of Nutrition 7, 682 (2008).
IP: 203.110.246.25
On:
15:31:12
L. Vasanelli, Sens. Actuators, B 69, 230 Copyright:
(2000).
71. D. M.
Holstege, B. Puschner, G. Whitehead, and F. D. Galey,
American Scientific
Publishers
39. S. Capone, M. Epifani, F. Quaranta, P. Siciliano, A. Taurino, and
J. Agric. Food Chem. 50, 406 (2002).
L. Vasanelli, Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 78, 174 (2001).
72. J. C. Oslon and A. C. Sanders, Journal of Milk and Food
40. H. Yu, J. Wang, and Y. Xu, Sensors and Materials 19, 275 (2007).
Technology 38, 630 (1975).
41. K. Toko, Biosensensors and Bioelectronics 13, 701 (1998).
73. R. Nijsten, N. London, A. V. de Bogaard, and E. Stobberingh,
42. M. Hruskar, N. Major, M. Krpan, I. P. Krbavcic, G. Saric,
J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 37, 1131 (1996).
K. Markovic, and N. Vahcic, Mljekarstvo 59, 193 (2009).
74. A. Molina, M. P. Molina, R. L. Althaus, and L. Gallego, The Vet43. I. M. P. L. V. Ferreira, J. L. F. C. Lima, and A. O. S. S. Rangel,
erinary Journal 165, 84 (2003).
Food Chem. 50, 423 (1994).
75. J. C. Schultz, J. S. Adamson, W. W. Workman, and T. D. Norman,
44. J. L. F. C. Lima, C. Delerue-Matos, and M. C. V. F. Vaz, Ciencia
English Journal of Medicine 269, 999 (1963).
y Tecnologia Alimentaria 2, 234 (2000).
76. J. R. D. Allison, British Veterinary Journal 141, 121 (1985).
45. A. Ramsing, J. Ruzicka, and E. H. Hansen, Analytica Chimica Acta
77. A. D. Ormerod, T. M. Reid, and R. A. Main, Clinical Allergy
129, 1 (1981).
17, 229 (1987).
46. F. V. Silva, G. B. Souza, L. F. M. Ferraz, and A. R. A. Nogueira,
78. J. J. Ryan, E. E. Wildman, A. H. Duthie, H. V. Atherton, and J. A.
Food Chem. 67, 317 (1999).
Aleonq, J. Dairy Sci. 69, 1510 (1986).
47. J. Ruzicka and G. D. Marshall, Anal. Chim. Acta 237, 329 (1990).
79. E. N. Escober, Use of Antibiotic Residue Test Kits
48. M. Janzekovic, M. Brus, B. Mursec, P. Vinis, D. Stajnko, and
for Goat Milk, Technical Report Langston University,
F. Cus, Journal of Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing
http://www.luresext.edu/goats/library/field/escobar99b.pdf (1999).
Engineering 34, 39 (2009).
80. P. Norma, G. Rey, N. Mario, D. Gilberto, L. Hector, E. Irma, and
49. F. J. Ferrero, G. Grillo, M. A. Perez, J. C. Anton, and J. C. Campo,
M. Zenaida, J. AOAC Int. 85, 20 (2002).
Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Instrumentation and Mea81. P. L. Ruegg and T. J. Tabone, J. Dairy Sci. 83, 2805 (2000).
surement Technology, IMTC 2002, Orlando, Florida, USA (2002),
82. P. L. Ruegg, NMC Annual Meeting Proceedings (2005), p. 28.
Vol. 1, p. 375.
83. J. Kneebone, P. C. W. Tsang, and D. H. Townson, J. Dairy Sci.
50. R. S. Fernando, R. B. Rindsig, and S. L. Spahr, J. Dairy Sci. 65, 659
93, 3961 (2010).
(1982).
84. S. Benedetti, F. Bonomi, S. Iametti, S. Mannino, and M. S. Cosio,
51. J. L. Linzell and M. Peaker, British Veterianary Journal 131, 447
2nd Central European Meeting 5th Croatian Congress of Food
(1975).
Technologists, Biotechnologists and Nutritionists, Opatija, Croatia
52. J. L. Linzell, M. Peaker, and J. G. Rowell, Journal of Agriculture
(2004), p. 101.
science 83, 309 (1974).
85. F. Destaillats, M. de Wispelaere, F. Joffre, P.-A. Golay, B. Hug,
53. P. Milner, K. L. Page, A. W. Walton, and J. E. Hillerton, J. Dairy
F. Giuffrida, L. Fauconnot, and F. Dionisi, J. Chromatogr. A
Sci. 79, 83 (1996).
1131, 227 (2006).
54. E. Gustavsson, P. Bjurling, J. Degelaen, and A. Sternesjo, Food and
86. J. Lopez-Tapia, M. R. Garcia-Risco, M. A. Manso, and R. LopezAgricultural Immunology 14, 121 (2002).
Fandino, J. Chromatogr. A 836, 153 (1999).
16
Das et al.
17
REVIEW
87. J. Dziuba, D. Nalecz, B. D. Piotr Minkiewicz, and Bartlomiej, Anal.

121. L. Escuder-Gilaberta and M. Peris, Anal. Chim. Acta 665, 15
Chim. Acta 521, 17 (2004).
(2010).
88. M. Ntakatsane, X. Liu, and P. Zhou, J. Dairy Sci. 96 (2013).
122. G. Enne, D. Elez, F. Fondrini, I. Bonizzi, M. Feligini, and
89. S. N. Jha and T. Matsuoka, Journal of Food Science and
R. Aleandri, J. Chromatogr. A 1094, 169 (2005).
TechnologyMysore 41, 313 (2004).
123. M. A. M. Madkour and B. M. I. Moussa, Nahrung/Food 33, 77
90. F. Ulberth, J. AOAC Int. 77, 1326 (1994).
(1989).
91. R. E. Timms, Journal of Dairy Research 47, 295 (1980).
124. I. Recio, M. R. Garcia-Risco, R. Lopez-Fandino, A. Olano, and
92. T. Sato, S. Kawano, and M. Iwamoto, J. Dairy Sci. 73, 3408 (1990).
M. Ramos, International Dairy Journal 10, 333 (2000).
93. B. A. Lawton and R. Pethig, Measurement Science Technology
125. R.-F. Guan, D. hong Liu, X. qian Ye, and K. Yang, Journal of
4, 38 (1993).
Zhejiang University Science B 6, 1101 (2005).
94. D. M. A. M. Luykx, J. H. G. Cordewener, P. Ferranti,
126. J.-Y. Qian, W. Chen, W.-M. Zhang, and H. Zhang, Carbohydr.
R. Frankhuizen, M. G. E. G. Bremer, H. Hooijerink, and A. H.
Polym. 78, 620 (2009).
America, J. Chromatogr. A 1164, 189 (2007).
127. J. R. Lake, J. E. Hillerton, B. Ambler, and H. C. Wheeler, Journal
95. R. Sharma, Y. S. Rajput, Poonam, G. Dogra, and S. K. Tomar,
of Dairy Research 59, 11 (1992).
International Journal of Dairy Technology 62, 514 (2009).
128. M. Nielen, H. Deluyker, Y. H. Schukken, and A. Brand, J. Dairy
96. S. Labreche, S. Bazzo, S. Cade, and E. Chanie, Sensors and ActuSci. 75, 606 (1992).
ators B: Chemical 106, 199 (2005).
129. G. J. Grillo, M. A. Perez, J. C. Anton, and F. J. Ferrero, Proceed97. W. Haasnoot, N. G. Smits, A. E. Kemmers-Voncken, and M. G.
ings of IEEE Sensors (2002), Vol. 1, p. 217.
Bremer, Journal of Dairy Research 71, 322 (2004).
130. G. J. Grillo, M. A. Perez, J. C. Anton, and F. J. Ferrero, Proceed98. I. Mafra, A. Roxo, I. M. P. L. V. O. Ferreira, and M. B. P. P.
ings of the IEEE Conference Instrumentation and Measurement
Oliveira, International Dairy Journal 17, 1132 (2007).
Technology, IMTC 2002, Alaska, USA (2002), Vol. 1, p. 153.
99. I. P. Hurley, R. C. Coleman, H. E. Ireland, and J. H. H. Williams,
131. C. J. Fourie, P. J. V. der Westhuyzen, and P. C. V. Niekerk, ProInternational Dairy Journal 16, 805 (2006).
ceedings of the AFRICON, Windhoek Namibia (2007), p. 1.
100. I. P. Hurley, R. C. Coleman, H. E. Ireland, and J. H. H. Williams,
132. P. J. van der Westhuyzen, Probe Characterisation, Design and EvalJ. Dairy Sci. 87, 543 (2004).
uation for the Real-time Quality Indication of Milk, Masters Thesis
101. J. G. Sargeant, P. J. Farnell, and A. Baker, Journal of the AssociaUniversity of Stellenbosch, South Africa (2006).
tion of Public Analysts 27, 131 (1989).
133. K. Biswas, S. Sen, and P. K. Dutta, Sensors and Actuators B:
102. J. Bania, M. Ugorski, A. Polanowski, and E. Adamczyk, Journal
Chemical 119, 186 (2006).
134. C. J. Felice, R. E. Madrid, J. M. Olivera, V. I. Rotger, and M. E.
of Dairy Research 68, 333 (2001).
Valentinuzzi, J. Microbiol. Methods 35, 37 (1999).
103. C.-L. Zhang, M. R. Fowler, N. W. Scott, G. Lawson, and A. Slater,
135. J. Ren and J. Chen, 2011 International Conference on New TechFood Control 18, 1149 (2007).
nology of Agricultural Engineering (ICAE), Zibo (2011), p. 841.
104. C. Maudet and P. Taberlet, Journal of Dairy Research 68, 229
136. J. R.to:
Bishop,
C. H. White, and R. Firstenberg-Eden, Journal of
(2001).
IIT Kharagpur
47, 471 (1984).
105. H. K. Mayer, International Dairy IP:
Journal
15, 595 (2005). On: Tue, 16 Food
203.110.246.25
Feb Protection
2016 15:31:12
137. Poisoned
milk for pupils; Report That Formaldehyde Caused Death
106. I. M. Lopez-Calleja, I. Gonzalez, V. Fajardo,
P. E. Hernandez,
Copyright:
American Scientific
Publishers
of Pupil in Boston, Technical report http://queryanytimes.com/
T. Garcia, and R. Martin, International Dairy Journal 17, 87
mem/archive-free/pdf (1905).
(2007).
138. Tests to Detect Adulteration of Milk, http://ezinearticles.com/Tests
107. L. Amigo, M. Ramos, P. J. Martin-Alvarez, and M. Barbosa,
J. Dairy Sci. 74, 1482 (1991).
-to-Detect-Adulteration-of-Milk.
108. R.-K. Chen, L.-W. Chang, Y.-Y. Chung, M.-H. S. Lee, and Y.-C.
139. P. M. dos Santos, L. F. B. Costa, and E. R. P. Filho, Food and
Ling, Rapid Communicantion in Mass Spectrometry 18, 1167
Nutrition Sciences 3, 1228 (2012).
(2004).
140. E. Bramanti, C. Sortino, M. Onor, F. Beni, and G. Raspi, J. Chro109. R. S. Farag, M. M. Hewedi, S. H. Abo-Raya, and H. H. Khalifa,
matogr. A 994, 59 (2003).
Journal of the American Oil Chemists Society 61, 913 (1984).
141. R. Sharma, Y. S. Rajput, S. Kaur, and S. K. Tomar, Journal of
110. M. Bottero, T. Civera, A. Anastasio, R. M. Turi, and S. Rosati,
Dairy Research 75, 466 (2008).
Journal of Food Protection 65, 362 (2002).
142. N. Verma and M. Singh, Biosens. Bioelectron. 18, 1219 (2003).
111. M. T. Bottero, T. Civera, D. Nucera, S. Rosati, P. Sacchi, and R. M.
143. W. R. Butler, J. J. Calaman, and S. W. Beam, Journal of Animal
Turi, International Dairy Journal 13, 277 (2003).
Science 74, 858 (1996).
112. Lpez-Calleja, I. Gonzalaz, V. Fajardo, I. Martin, P. E. Hernandez,
144. S. F. Larson, W. R. Butler, and W. B. Currie, J. Dairy Sci. 80, 1288
T. Garcia, and R. Martin, J. Dairy Sci. 88, 3115 (2005).
(1997).
113. Lpez-Calleja, I. Gonzalez, V. Fajardo, M. A. Rodriguez, P. E.
145. Ramakrishnaiah and G. S. Bhat, Indian J. Dairy Sci. 39, 60 (1986).
Hernandez, T. Garcia, and R. Martin, J. Dairy Sci. 87, 2839 (2004).
146. S. D. Kandpal, A. K. Srivastava, and K. S. Negi, Indian Journal of
114. C. S. Pappas, P. A. Tarantilis, E. Moschopoulou, G. Moatsou,
Community Health 24, 188 (2012).
I. Kandarakis, and M. Polissiou, Food Chem. 106, 1271 (2008).
147. A. H. Ohlsson, J. A. Fauerbach, N. J. Sacco, M. C. Bonetto, and
115. T. L. Fodey, C. S. Thompson, I. M. Traynor, S. A. Haughey, D. G.
E. Corton, Sensor 12, 12220 (2012).
Kennedy, and S. R. Crooks, Analytical Chemistry 83, 5012 (2011).
148. M. Luzzana and R. Giardino, Lait 79, 261 (1999).
116. A. D. Pinto, M. C. Conversano, V. T. Forte, L. Novello, and G. M.
149. Z. Brzozka, M. Dawgul, D. Pijanowska, and W. Torbicz, Sensors
Tantillo, Journal of Food Quality 27, 428 (2004).
and Actiator B: Chemical 44, 527 (1997).
117. N. Costa, F. Ravasco, R. Miranda, M. Duthoit, and L. B. Roseiro,
150. S. Caras and J. Janata, Analytical Chemistry 52, 1935 (1980).
Small Ruminant Research 79, 73 (2008).
151. M. J. Daniel and J. M. Delwiche, Biosens. Bioelectron. 17, 557
(2002).
118. A. C. A. Veloso, N. Teixeira, and I. M. P. L. V. O. Ferreira, J. Chro152. M. J. Daniel, J. D. Michael, E. J. Depeters, and R. H. B. Durant,
matogr. A 967, 209 (2002).
J. Dairy Sci. 83, 2042 (2000).
119. L. A. Dias, A. M. Peres, A. C. A. Veloso, F. S. Reis, M. Vilas-Boas,
153. M. J. Daniel, J. D. Michael, E. J. Depeters, and R. H. B. Durant,
and A. A. S. C. Machado, Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical
J. Dairy Sci. 82, 1999 (1999).
136, 209 (2009).
154. B. S. Bector, R. Moti, and O. P. Singhal, Indian Dairyman 50, 59
120. T. R. L. C. Paixao and M. Bertotti, Sensors and Actuators B:
Chemical 137, 266 (2009).
(1998).
REVIEW

155. M. K. Bhavadasan, Y. S. Rajput, and N. C. Ganguli, Indian J. Dairy
Sci. 35, 263 (1982).
156. P. W. Hansen, Milchwissenschaft 53, 251 (1998).
157. E. Kress-Rogers and C. J. B. Brimelow, Instrumentation and sensors for the food industry, 2nd edn., CRC press, North America,
USA (2000).
158. A. F. Wolfschoon-Pombo and M. A. M. Furtado, Zeitschrift fur
Lebensmitteluntersuchung und-Forschung A 188, 16 (1989).
159. G. Cartoni, F. Coccioli, R. Jasionowska, and M. Masci, J. Chromatogr. A 846, 135 (1999).
160. C. Y. Olieman, C. Y., and J. W. V. Riel, Netherlands Milk and
161. M. G. E. G. Bremer, A. E. M. Kemmers-Voncken, E. A. M. Boers,
and R. F. W. Haasnoot, International Dairy Journal 18, 294 (2008).
162. B. Miralles, B. Bartolome, M. Ramos, and L. Amigo, International
163. N. A. Chavez, E. Salinas, J. Jauregui, L. A. Palomares, and
K. Macias, Food and Agricultural Immunology 19, 265 (2008).
164. S. Oancea, Romanian Biotechnological Letters 14, 4146 (2009).
165. M. F. Mabrook and M. C. Petty, Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical
96, 215 (2003).
166. M. F. Mabrook and M. C. Petty, Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical
84, 136 (2002).
167. B. Buttel, M. Fuchs, and B. Holz, Chemistry Central Journal, doi:
10.1186/1752 (2008).
168. V. L. M. Alonso and M. A. Minor, Conference on Electronics,
Robotics and Automotive Mechanics, Cuernavaca (2006), p. 47.
Das et al.
169. G. S. Barham, M. Khaskheli, and A. H. Soomro, Journal of Food
and Nutrition Sciences 2, 47 (2014).
170. G. Mucchetti, M. Gatti, and E. Neviani, J. Dairy Sci. 77, 940
(1994).
171. A. Sadat, P. Gupta, and M. J. R. Khan, Special Issue of International Journal of Computer Applications 1 (2011).
172. S. Das, M. Sivaramakrishna, M. Dey, B. Goswami, and K. Biswas,
Proceedings of the IEEE Sensors 2009, Newzealand (2009), p. 745.
173. J. K. Banach, R. Zywica, J. Szpendowski, and K. Kielczewska,
International Journal of Food Properties, DOI:10.1080/10942
912.2010.483614 (2011).
174. S. Das, M. Sivaramakrishna, B. Goswami, and K. Biswas, IEEE
International Conference on Industrial Electronics, Control and
Robotics, NIT Rourkela, December (2010).
175. S. Das, M. Sivaramakrishna, B. Goswami, and K. Biswas,
2nd International IEEE Conference on Emerging Applications of
Information Technology, Kolkata, February (2011).
176. J. Ross Macdonald and Solarton Group Limited LEVMW, version
8.07; August (2005), Immit tance, Inversion, and simulation Fitting
Programs for Windows and MS-DOS.
177. S. Das, M. Sivaramakrishna, K. Biswas, and B. Goswami, Sensors
and Actuators A: Physical 167, 273 (2011).
178. S. Das, M. Sivaramakrishna, B. Goswami, and K. Biswas, The Fifth
International Conference on Sensor Technologies and Applications,
Nice, France (2011).
Delivered by Publishing Technology to: IIT Kharagpur

IP: 203.110.246.25 On: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:31:12
18

Milk Adukteration Detection Review

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Milk Adukteration Detection Review

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

See

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

Ramrao Adik Institute of Technology

16 PUBLICATIONS 102 CITATIONS

40 PUBLICATIONS 230 CITATIONS

Development of a low cost conductivity meter for aqua-agriculture View project

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,

Available from: Siuli Das

Copyright 2016 American Scientific Publishers

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

Keywords: Milk Adulteration, Health Hazard, Detection Techniques, Electrical Methods,

Delivered by Publishing Technology

Corresponding author; E-mail: siulidas2@gmail.com

lems. Addition of water changes specific gravity of the

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

detection of chemical adulterants sophisticated instrument

2. MILK ADULTERANT AND ITS DETECTION

Sensor Letters 14, 418, 2016

foods to add flavor and reduce the cost of the products.14

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

Sensor Letters 14, 418, 2016

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

Sensor Letters 14, 418, 2016

organisms but have limited effects on drug residues.7 24

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

2.4. Low-Valued Milk

Sensor Letters 14, 418, 2016

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

Sensor Letters 14, 418, 2016

impedance method has advantages over the Moseley test as

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

method, enzymatic catalysis reaction takes place in the

Sensor Letters 14, 418, 2016

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

Sequential injection analysis

Optical biosensor (BIACORE 3000) tool

FAST (Fluorescence of advanced maillard products and soluble tryptophan)

Reverse phase HPLC method

Sensor Letters 14, 418, 2016

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

Frequency admittance measurements

by centrifuge and then amount of phosphor and nitrogen

mixed in milk. When the milk is adulterated with water,

Sensor Letters 14, 418, 2016

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

3.2. Conductance Measurement

the chemical additives. Anwar et al. has reported an ultrasonic

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

semiconductor sensors which can monitor the adulteration

of the milk. Conductivity is an easy parameter to detect

Different electrical methods to detect milk adulteration.

[3, 17, 37, 41, 42]

Sensor Letters 14, 418, 2016

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

Gas liquid chromatography

Adulteration in milk is normally present in its most crude

Lopez, and G. P. Flores, Interciencia 30, 291 (2005).

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

Sensor Letters 14, 418, 2016

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

Sensor Letters 14, 418, 2016

87. J. Dziuba, D. Nalecz, B. D. Piotr Minkiewicz, and Bartlomiej, Anal.

Milk Adulteration and Detection: A Review

Delivered by Publishing Technology to: IIT Kharagpur