IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aoj/agafsr/v3y2016i1p19-24id158.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of Some Quality Characteristics of Milk from White Fulani Cow, Ouda Ewe, and Kano Brown Doe Reared Under the Same Environment

Author

Listed:
  • Hauwa L. Yusuf
  • Amin O. Igwegbe
  • Paul Y. Idakwo

Abstract

This study was carried out on three lactating animal species namely: Ouda ewe (A), White Fulani cow (B), and Kano Brown doe (C), at the middle of their second lactation period or parity. The purpose was to compare the gross chemical composition (ash, moisture, total solids, protein, fat, lactose, calcium, pH and titratable acidity) as well as the calorific value of the fresh milk from the three species reared under the same environment. The components were determined using standard analytical methods while the lactose contents were determined by difference. The Ouda ewe milk recorded significantly higher (P 0.05) levels of ash (0.77 0.21%), total solids (19.31 0.17%), protein (4.38 0.04%), lactose (5.36 0.59%), calcium (182.33±0.22mg/100g, and calorific value (88.01±1.22 Cal/100g); and significantly lower (P 0.05) level of moisture (84.04 1.64%) than the White Fulani cow and Kano Brown doe milks. And the lowest levels of pH (6.78 0.06) and titratable acidity (0.22 0.03%) were recorded in the White Fulani cow milk. The results were in agreement with those obtained elsewhere around the world and, it was recommended that efforts should be intensified in creating awareness in Nigeria about the higher nutritional profile of milk from small ruminants and towards breeding of more lactogenic ewe.

Suggested Citation

  • Hauwa L. Yusuf & Amin O. Igwegbe & Paul Y. Idakwo, 2016. "Comparison of Some Quality Characteristics of Milk from White Fulani Cow, Ouda Ewe, and Kano Brown Doe Reared Under the Same Environment," Agriculture and Food Sciences Research, Asian Online Journal Publishing Group, vol. 3(1), pages 19-24.
  • Handle: RePEc:aoj:agafsr:v:3:y:2016:i:1:p:19-24:id:158
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://asianonlinejournals.com/index.php/AESR/article/view/158/137
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aoj:agafsr:v:3:y:2016:i:1:p:19-24:id:158. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sara Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://asianonlinejournals.com/index.php/AESR/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.