Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
10.55041/IJSREM.ISTCESD011
Volume:
10 |
9 |
Sep 2026
Pages:
1-9
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Department of Dairy science,
Sambhajirao Kendre College, Jalkot, Dist- Latur-413532, Maharashtra, India
Consumer demand for minimally processed dairy products with intact nutritional and functional characteristics has accelerated research into non-thermal 'green' preservation technologies as alternatives to conventional thermal pasteurization. This review examines three of the most extensively studied non-thermal technologies for milk preservation — high-pressure processing (HPP), pulsed electric field (PEF) processing, and power ultrasound — with specific focus on their impact on bioactive milk proteins (immunoglobulins, lactoferrin, lactoperoxidase, and related whey proteins) and on the enzymatic inactivation kinetics that underpin process validation and safety assurance. HPP disrupts non-covalent interactions within casein micelles and can denature pressure-sensitive whey proteins such as β-lactoglobulin at pressures above approximately 400 MPa, while comparatively preserving lactoferrin and immunoglobulin structure at moderate pressure-time combinations. PEF acts primarily through electroporation of microbial membranes and achieves microbial and partial enzymatic inactivation with minimal bulk heating, generally retaining more native protein structure than thermal treatment. Ultrasound-induced acoustic cavitation can physically remodel fat globules and protein aggregates, but substantial enzyme inactivation typically requires combination with mild heat (thermosonication). We further compare the kinetic modeling frameworks — first-order (D/z-value), Weibull, quasi-chemical, and PEF-specific empirical models — used to describe enzyme inactivation across these technologies, highlighting where classical first-order assumptions break down and non-linear models are required. The review concludes with a discussion of regulatory status, industrial scale-up barriers, and research priorities for translating laboratory-scale non-thermal processing into validated, commercially deployable milk preservation systems.
KEYWORDS
High-pressure processing, pulsed electric field processing, and power ultrasound each offer genuine advantages over thermal pasteurization for preserving heat-labile bioactive milk proteins, but none is a universal drop-in replacement. HPP achieves strong microbial inactivation at pressures that can simultaneously compromise pressure-sensitive whey proteins such as β-lactoglobulin and immunoglobulin G, while better preserving lactoferrin and alkaline phosphatase structure. PEF offers the least thermal impact and the strongest protein-preservation profile among the three, but enzyme inactivation is more limited and highly dependent on field strength and specific energy input. Ultrasound alone has minimal effect on indigenous milk enzymes and typically requires combination with mild heat to achieve meaningful inactivation, positioning thermosonication as a hybrid rather than purely non-thermal approach. Across all three technologies, enzyme inactivation kinetics frequently deviate from classical first-order behavior, and accurate process validation increasingly depends on Weibull, biphasic, or technology-specific kinetic models rather than thermal-processing precedent. Continued joint investigation of microbial safety and bioactive protein preservation, supported by robust and technology-appropriate kinetic modeling, will be essential to moving these green processing technologies from laboratory demonstration to validated commercial practice in dairy science.
[1] R. Sykora, C. Mark, M. Biondi Ryan, B. Barman, M. Pitino, and D. C. Dallas, "Effect of high-pressure processing operating parameters on microbial inactivation and bioactive protein preservation in bovine milk: A systematic review," Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf., 2025, doi: 10.1111/1541-4337.70324. [2] S. A. Siddiqui, S. Khan, N. A. Bahmid, A. A. Nagdalian, S. M. Jafari, and R. Castro-Muñoz, “Impact of high-pressure processing on the bioactive compounds of milk—A comprehensive review,” J. Food Sci. Technol., vol. 61, no. 9, pp. 1632–1651, 2024. [3] P. Vashisht, L. Singh, S. Mahanta, D. Verma, S. Sharma, G. S. Saini, A. Sharma, B. Chowdhury, N. Awasti, and D. S. Chauhan, "Pulsed electric field processing in the dairy sector: A review of applications, quality impact and implementation challenges," Int. J. Food Sci. Technol., vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 2122–2135, 2024. [4] A. Mohamad, N. N. A. K. Shah, A. Sulaiman, N. M. Adzahan, R. N. Arshad, and R. M. Aadil, “The impact of pulsed electric fields on milk’s macro- and micronutrient profile: A comprehensive review,” Foods, vol. 12, no. 11, Art. no. 2114, 2023. [5] F. Siddique, S. Imtiaz, S. Noreen, M. Bilal, M. N. Zubairi, H. Shabbir, R. Iqbal, A. Hussain, and H. W. Woldemariam, “Emerging trends and future perspectives in pulsed electric technology for dairy processing: A comprehensive review,” Discover Food, vol. 6, Art. no. 51, 2026. [6] P. Sharma, I. Oey, and D. W. Everett, "Effect of pulsed electric field processing on the functional properties of bovine milk," Trends Food Sci. Technol., vol. 35, pp. 87–101, 2014. [7] P. Sharma, I. Oey, P. Bremer, and D. W. Everett, "Microbiological and enzymatic activity of bovine whole milk treated by pulsed electric fields," Int. J. Dairy Technol., vol. 71, pp. 10–19, 2018. [8] N. Horlacher, I. Oey, and S. Y. Leong, “Effect of pulsed electric field processing on microbial and enzyme inactivation in blended plant-based milk alternatives: A case study on a microbial challenge test for a non-presterilized oat-based beverage enriched with pea protein,” Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol., vol. 94, Art. no. 103699, 2024. [9] S. Sutariya, V. Sunkesula, R. Kumar, and K. Shah, “Emerging applications of ultrasonication and cavitation in dairy industry: A review,” Cogent Food Agric., vol. 4, no. 1, Art. no. 1549187, 2018. [10] M. Munir, M. Nadeem, T. M. Qureshi, T. S. H. Leong, C. J. Gamlath, G. J. O. Martin, and M. Ashokkumar, “Effects of high pressure, microwave and ultrasound processing on proteins and enzyme activity in dairy systems—A review,” Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol., vol. 57, Art. no. 102192, 2019.
Publication Date
9/28/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
0
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
1
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...