Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-mx8w7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-30T11:14:43.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Microbiological aspects in whey powder production: What is the relevance of enterotoxigenic Staphylococcus aureus?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 August 2025

Jean Victor dos Santos Emiliano
Affiliation:
InovaLeite – Laboratório de Pesquisa em Leites e Derivados, Departamento de Tecnologia de Alimentos, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa, MG, Brazil
Andressa Fusieger
Affiliation:
InovaLeite – Laboratório de Pesquisa em Leites e Derivados, Departamento de Tecnologia de Alimentos, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa, MG, Brazil
Anderson Carlos Camargo
Affiliation:
InsPOA – Laboratório de Inspeção de Produtos de Origem Animal, Departamento de Veterinária, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa, MG, Brazil
Fabíola Faria da Cruz Rodrigues
Affiliation:
InovaLeite – Laboratório de Pesquisa em Leites e Derivados, Departamento de Tecnologia de Alimentos, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa, MG, Brazil
Luis Augusto Nero*
Affiliation:
InsPOA – Laboratório de Inspeção de Produtos de Origem Animal, Departamento de Veterinária, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa, MG, Brazil
Ítalo Tuler Perrone
Affiliation:
Faculdade de Farmácia, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
Antônio Fernandes de Carvalho
Affiliation:
InovaLeite – Laboratório de Pesquisa em Leites e Derivados, Departamento de Tecnologia de Alimentos, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa, MG, Brazil
*
Corresponding author: Luis Augusto Nero; Email: nero@ufv.br
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Whey, a greenish-yellow liquid resulting from curd separation in cheese manufacturing, was historically considered economically insignificant in the dairy industry and often discarded into the environment without proper oversight. However, recognizing its high nutritional value, whey has become a valuable ingredient in the food industry. Unprocessed whey (raw material) is highly susceptible to contamination, as it can serve as a substrate for the multiplication of a range of microorganisms, including spoilage, spore forming, pathogenic and toxin producing bacteria, particularly if stored at inappropriate temperatures. Staphylococcus aureus is one of these potential pathogenic bacteria often associated to dairy, that can also persist in the environment through biofilm formation and, once reaching the food matrix, can grow and produce enterotoxins. During the processing of whey powder production, there are points where S. aureus might find its way into the final product. Here we demonstrate critical contamination steps, and we highlight the need for more research to assess the microbiological integrity of whey powder, especially in Brazil, where its production has been growing in recent years. Considering the increasing use of whey powder as an ingredient for various formulations, continuous surveillance for the presence of spoilage microbiota and potentially pathogens, including S. aureus and associated enterotoxins is indispensable to prevent food poisoning outbreaks.

Information

Type
Invited Review
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Hannah Dairy Research Foundation.

Introduction

Bovine milk stands as one of the most versatile foods for humans and is used for various dairy products, such as cheese, yogurt, fermented milk, butter, milk powder and dried dairy powders. In 2020, Europe witnessed a substantial milk production of nearly 158 million tonnes, with almost 50% dedicated to cheese production, resulting in 54.8 million tons of liquid whey (Eurostat, 2020). In Brazil, whey processing presents challenges due to process technologies, often requiring complex industrial facilities and considerable financial investment (Alves et al., Reference Alves, De Oliveira Moreira, Rodrigues Júnior, Martins Mc de, Tuler Perrone and Fernandes2014; Costa et al., Reference Costa, Kuhn, Rama, Lehn and Souza2022). Much of the whey generated in Brazil, for example, originates from small and medium-sized cheese companies and despite the potential for developing new products based on whey, this co-product is often overlooked (Tabelini et al., Reference Tabelini, Lima, Borges and Aguiar2023).

Unsatisfactory hygienic conditions during cheese production and improper whey storage can compromise microbiological quality of this co-product (Santos et al., Reference Santos, Maranduba, de Almeida Neto and Rodrigues2017; Duarte et al., Reference Duarte, Lopes-da-silva, Gomes, Delgadillo, Barba and Saraiva2023). In this context, the presence of Staphylococcus aureus is an important concern. The natural habitat of this pathogen includes the skin and mucous membranes of both humans and animals (Thomson et al., Reference Thomson, García, Miles, Isla, Yáñez, Santibáñez, Núñez, Flores-Yáñez, Del Río and Cuadra2022; Howden et al., Reference Howden, Giulieri, Wong Fok Lung, Baines, Sharkey, Lee, Hachani, Monk and Stinear2023) and poor hygienic practices during food production and processing can lead to contamination and possible production of staphylococcal enterotoxins (SEs) in food matrix (Deddefo et al., Reference Deddefo, Mamo, Asfaw and Amenu2023; Souza et al., Reference Souza, da Silva, Lopes, Rosa, Bazzolli and Pimentel-Filho2024). SEs are water-soluble, resistant to proteolytic enzymes in the digestive system, and can survive thermal treatments like pasteurization and ultra-pasteurization (Landgraf and Destro, Reference Landgraf, Destro, Morris and Potter2013; Guanhong et al., Reference Guanhong, Zonghong, Yao, Xu, Ting and Xin2023). As S. aureus can grow in various food types, there are numerous potential sources of staphylococcal food poisoning, such as milk and cream, cream-filled pastries, butter, ham, cheeses, sausages, canned meat, salads, cooked meals and sandwich fillings (Grispoldi et al., Reference Grispoldi, Karama, Armani, Hadjicharalambous and Cenci-Goga2021). Indeed, the presence of S. aureus in dairy products, specifically in cheese, has been reported by several studies (Gonzalez et al., Reference Gonzalez, Marques, Gomes, Beltrão JC do C, Pinheiro, Esper, Paula, Teixeira and Aguiar-Alves2017; Nunes and Caldas, Reference Nunes and Caldas2017; Alves et al., Reference Alves, Niño-Arias, Pitondo-Silva, de Araújo Frazilio, de Oliveira Gonçalves, Chaul Toubas, Sapateiro Torres, Oxaran, Dittmann and De Martinis2018; da Silva Cândido et al., Reference da Silva Cândido, da Silva, de Matos, da Silva Do Nascimento, Camargo, Cobo Zanella, Mores Rall and Cirone Silva2020; Silva et al., Reference Silva, Carvalho, Andretta and Nero2021). These studies have found S. aureus concentrations higher than 105 cfu/g and potentially intoxicating levels of SEs. During the 1950s, contamination of milk powder with SEs posed a significant issue, often due to S. aureus multiplication and enterotoxin production in raw milk before heat treatment or in concentrated milk prior to drying. Hygiene improvements and temperature control before drying resolved this problem (Anderson and Stone, Reference Anderson and Stone1955; Armijo et al., Reference Armijo, Henderson, Timothee, Robinson and Fapha1957). However, in 2000, an outbreak linked to the consumption of reconstituted skimmed milk powder was reported in Japan. While sample analysis did not show viable S. aureus, heat-stable SEs were detected at concentrations sufficient to induce illness (Asao et al., Reference Asao, Kumeda, Kawai, Shibata, Oda, Haruki, Nakazawa and Kozaki2003).

Whey is a co-product that can serve as a substrate for S. aureus, particularly when stored at temperatures favorable for its growth (Miller and Ledford, Reference Miller and Ledford1977; Halpin-Dohnalek and Marth, Reference Halpin-Dohnalek and Marth1989; Mehli et al., Reference Mehli, Hoel, Thomassen, Jakobsen and Karlsen2017). Nonetheless, studies addressing the presence of SEs in whey powder (WP) remains scarce. Within this context, this review aims to underscore the significance of S. aureus in WP processing and identify possible critical contamination steps during production. This knowledge will allow the implementation of strategies to avoid the presence of S. aureus and its associated enterotoxins in WP.

Whey

Whey can be defined as the liquid milk derivative obtained during the production of cheese, casein, or similar products by separation from the curd following the milk's coagulation, and/or products derived from milk. The coagulation process primarily involves the activity of enzymes, especially those of the rennet type (Codex Alimentarius, 1995) and the whey can present in liquid, concentrated or powder forms. Approximately 80–90% of milk processed in cheese manufacturing facilities becomes whey (Buchanan et al., Reference Buchanan, Martindale, Romeih and Hebishy2023). Globally, the annual production of whey is estimated to be around 206 million tonnes (Tebbouche et al., Reference Tebbouche, Aziza, Abada, Chergui, Amrane and Hellal2024), with a yearly growth rate of approximately 1-2% (Buchanan et al., Reference Buchanan, Martindale, Romeih and Hebishy2023).

In terms of classification, sweet whey originates from enzymatic milk coagulation employing enzymes of microbial, vegetable or animal origin (such as chymosin), and presents a pH between 6.0 and 6.8. Acid whey is obtained during cheese making after acid-induced milk coagulation using lactic, acetic, or citric acids, or lactic yeast, and presents a pH below 6.0 (Brazil, 2020a). The two coagulation processes yield whey types with distinct compositions, as presented in Table 1 (Papademas and Kotsaki, Reference Papademas and Kotsaki2019). Acid whey exhibits lower lactose concentration due to the fermentation process that converts a fraction of lactose into lactic acid during the formation of the curd. Conversely, acid whey contains higher levels of calcium and phosphorus compared to sweet whey, attributed to the solubilization of the calcium-phosphorus complex in casein micelles at acidic pH (Alves et al., Reference Alves, De Oliveira Moreira, Rodrigues Júnior, Martins Mc de, Tuler Perrone and Fernandes2014).

In Brazil, production is mainly represented by sweet whey, derived from cheese manufacturing through enzymatic coagulation, since cheeses such as Mozzarella, Prato and Minas Frescal are the most commercialized varieties in the country (Santos et al., Reference Santos, Maranduba, de Almeida Neto and Rodrigues2017; Trindade et al., Reference Trindade, Soares, Scudding, Guimarães, Esmerino, Freitas, Pimentel, Silva, Souza and Almada2019). According to Trindade et al. (Reference Trindade, Soares, Scudding, Guimarães, Esmerino, Freitas, Pimentel, Silva, Souza and Almada2019), who applied a questionnaire survey to 100 dairy industries from Southeast and South Brazil (most of them subjected to Federal Inspection System), these industries use whey mainly for production of dairy beverages (60%), ricotta (20%), whey concentrate (15%), and milk blends (5%), while 27% discard the whey in the effluent treatment system or use for animal feed. Hebishy et al. (Reference Hebishy, Yerlikaya, Mahony, Akpinar and Saygili2023) performed a systematic literature review and identified and examined 17 competitive factors that influence the production and use of whey by the Brazilian dairy industry. Four of these factors were referenced by more than ten authors: nutritional composition of products improvement, reduction of the environmental impact, sensorial aspects of products improvement and new production technologies.

Whey can also be obtained through microfiltration systems (Kelly, Reference Kelly, Deeth and Bansal2019; Reig et al., Reference Reig, Vecino and Cortina2021). Membrane technology is a key processing tool in agro-food industries for the treatment of food products, by-products and food waste (Castro-Muñoz et al., Reference Castro-Muñoz, Boczkaj, Gontarek, Cassano and Fíla2020; Reig et al., Reference Reig, Vecino and Cortina2021). The global market for microfiltration membranes reached approximately USD 3.9 billion in 2022 and should reach USD 6 billion by 2027, with a compound annual growth rate of 8.8% during the forecast period of 2022-2027 (BCC Research, 2023). Membrane techniques possess the ability to physically separate fat and proteins from lactose and mineral salts, including monovalent and divalent ions (Rice et al., Reference Rice, Kentish, Vivekanand, O'Connor, Stevens and Barber2005; Baldasso et al., Reference Baldasso, Silvestre, Silveira, Vanin, Cardozo and Tessaro2022). The resulting solution, known as permeate, contains particles smaller in size than the membrane pores and typically comprises around 4.5% lactose. On the other hand, substances of larger size, such as proteins and fats, are retained by the membrane, forming a solution referred to as concentrate (Rice et al., Reference Rice, Kentish, Vivekanand, O'Connor, Stevens and Barber2005; Bhushan and Etzel, Reference Bhushan and Etzel2009; Baldasso et al., Reference Baldasso, Silvestre, Silveira, Vanin, Cardozo and Tessaro2022).

Ultrafiltration is one of the most prevalent techniques employed in producing whey protein concentrate (WPC) and whey protein isolate (WPI). In this procedure, low molecular weight components like water, salts and lactose permeate the membrane, while proteins, due to their larger molecular weight and size, are retained (Kravtsov et al., Reference Kravtsov, Kulikova, Anisimov, Evdokimov and Khramtsov2021). While the dairy industry initially adopted this technology to find solutions for whey utilization (Price, Reference Price, Deeth and Bansal2019), its use remains relatively nascent in Brazil. In addition to ultrafiltration, a variety of advanced techniques are used for whey processing, such as reverse osmosis, drying, chromatographic methods, ion exchange, electrodialysis, fermentation and chemical processes, offering a spectrum of pathways for creating transformed products (Kilara and Vaghela, Reference Kilara, Vaghela and Yada2018; Kelly, Reference Kelly, Deeth and Bansal2019). Ohmic Heating has been considered as a potential technology for sweet whey processing, as it provides fast and uniform heating, minimizing the generation of off-flavor compounds and providing minor changes in nutrients, when compared to the traditional heat treatment (Costa et al., Reference Costa, Cappato, Ferreira, Pires, Moraes, Esmerino, Silva, Neto, Tavares and Freitas2018).

Whey contains a wide range of components, some holding significant nutritional value and biological activities that are intensifying interest in exploring this co-product (Kilara and Vaghela, Reference Kilara, Vaghela and Yada2018). High whey protein fractions, in particular, have drawn attention for their attractive properties, leading to their integration into food formulations. Indeed, the attraction for whey has gained ground within the dairy industry (Ballatore et al., Reference Ballatore, Bettiol M, Vanden Braber, Aminahuel, Rossi, Petroselli, Erra-Balsells, Cavaglieri and Montenegro2020; Tsermoula et al., Reference Tsermoula, Khakimov, Nielsen and Engelsen2021; Elkot et al., Reference Elkot, Elmahdy, El-Sawah, Alghamdia, Alhag, Al-Shahari, AL-Farga and Ismail2024). Ingredients derived from whey exhibit the most rapid market growth among all dairy ingredients, with the market valued at $53.8 billion in 2019 and projected to reach $81.4 billion by 2025 (Tsermoula et al., Reference Tsermoula, Khakimov, Nielsen and Engelsen2021). An important technological innovation in the milk production chain involves the conversion of whey into a valuable input. Producers are increasingly considering environmental responsibility, which is gaining prominence in the industry. This shift not only introduces a fresh income source for the industrial sector but also repurposes whey into a raw material to produce other items, primarily due to its high content of lactose and protein. This transformation enhances the economic efficiency of the dairy chain (Lavelli and Beccalli, Reference Lavelli and Beccalli2022; Al-Tayawi et al., Reference Al-Tayawi, Sisay, Beszédes and Kertész2023).

Contributions from consumer demand for healthier, innovative, safer and more convenient products have fueled the expansion of dairy beverage production (Guiné et al., Reference Guiné, Florença, Barroca and Anjos2020). In this way, dairy beverages are an alternative for the use of whey due to its cost-effectiveness, ease of processing, and compatibility with existing industry equipment (Alves et al., Reference Alves, Floriano, Voltarelli, de Rensis, Pimentel, Costa and Vianna2020; Kurnick et al., Reference Kurnick, Michellim, Yada, Junior and Tribst2024). Further alternatives encompass the manufacture of ricotta, protein isolates and the production of WP, that can be used in different formulations (Pires et al., Reference Pires, Marnotes, Rubio, Garcia and Pereira2021). There has been also a growing emphasis on the manufacturing of dried dairy powders, to create new products and enhance their shelf life. These powdered forms are applied in diverse product categories, including confectionery, infant formula, sports dietary supplements and supplements for health recovery (O'Donoghue and Murphy, Reference O'Donoghue and Murphy2023). For example, the increase in infant formula consumption drives a global need for lactose, thereby amplifying interest in whey as a primary source of this sugar (Tuler Perrone et al., Reference Tuler Perrone, Schuck, Caldas Pereira Silveira and Fernandes de Carvalho A2016).

Whey powder production

According to Božanić et al. (Reference Božanić, Barukčić, Jakopović and Tratnik2014), the main industrial processing of whey is drying to produce WP, which is 70% of the annual production of whey. As a main advantage, this process does not produce residues that should be treated, but on the other hand it demands a high initial investment to purchase the equipment, and consume a lot of energy during production. Furthermore, WP has a relatively low selling price when compared to WPC.

When fluid whey is obtained from other companies (smaller cheese manufacturers, for example), fluid whey may be subjected to pasteurization when arrives at the powder processing facility. Then, it is subjected to a sequence of procedures involving evaporation, lactose crystallization and drying, as shown in Fig. 1. The membrane separation process can also be used. These steps are designed to prevent microbial growth, by eliminating or deactivating microorganisms (Ziuzina et al., Reference Ziuzina, Los, Bourke and Fetsch2018). To preserve the freshly acquired whey and control microbial growth until heat treatment, it should be immediately refrigerated at 4 ºC. The reduction in temperature causes an extension of the latency time of microorganisms already present in the whey (Kilara, Reference Kilara, Chandan, Kilara and Shah2015). Hence, it is crucial to emphasize that during the steps involving heat treatment, the binomial time and temperature needs to be carefully respected.

Figure 1. Main steps in whey powder production.

Concentration of pasteurized fluid whey solids is achieved through vacuum evaporation, which incurs a significantly lower energy cost per kilogram of evaporated water compared to spray drying. This procedure allows concentration levels of milk solids ranging from 50% to 60% (m/m), carried out within temperatures of 45 to 70 ºC (Carić et al., Reference Carić, Akkerman, Milanović, Kentish, Tamime and Tamime2009; Schuck, Reference Schuck and Corredig2009). However, the temperature range used in the evaporators is not sufficient to ensure microbiological safety, and it is necessary to apply prior pasteurization to the fluid whey. Once concentrated, the solution proceeds to the crystallizer where the lactose undergoes crystallization. This stage aims to reduce the hygroscopicity of the powdered product, thus avoiding technological problems such as product adherence and agglomeration (Schuck, Reference Schuck and Corredig2009). From a microbial perspective, the lactose crystallization process plays a critical role in the processing of powdered whey, as the product remains at room temperature for extended periods (4 to 24 hours) under constant agitation at temperatures close to 25 ºC (Simeão et al., Reference Simeão, DA Silva, Stephani, de Oliveira, Schuck, de Carvalho and Perrone2018). After crystallization, spray drying is conducted with inlet air temperatures ranging from approximately 165 to 180 ºC and outlet air temperatures around 85 to 90 ºC. The fresh powder leaves the spray dryer at around 85 to 90 ºC, is cooled down to reach approximately 25 to 28 ºC and is then packaged. The spray drying phase significantly impacts both the yield and quality of WP. Challenges include the potential loss of powder yield due to high lactic acid and galactose content, leading to particle adhesion, and an elevated amorphous lactose content causing clumping during storage, impacting overall powder quality and shelf life (Ozel et al., Reference Ozel, McClements, Arikan, Kaner and Oztop2022).

Numerous surfaces come into contact with the product throughout WP processing, including equipment, utensils, and accessories. Consequently, the risk of pathogen cross-contamination cannot be disregarded (Martin et al., Reference Martin, de Oliveira E Silva, da Fonseca, Morales, Souza Pamplona Silva, Miquelluti and Porto2016; Andritsos and Mataragas, Reference Andritsos and Mataragas2023). To avoid this, the industry employs a strategy of cleaning and sanitization of all equipment and utensils that come into contact with the product during processing. This hygiene procedure can be performed with the use of chemicals, such as detergents and sanitizers (Martin et al., Reference Martin, de Oliveira E Silva, da Fonseca, Morales, Souza Pamplona Silva, Miquelluti and Porto2016; Wang et al., Reference Wang, Puri, Demirci, Demirci, Feng and Krishnamurthy2020).

Microbiological aspects relevant for whey powder production

Fluid whey is considered to be a favorable medium for microorganism growth, due to factors such as pH (6.0-6.8), high water activity (0.92%) and significant amounts of nutrients (Table 1: Pescuma et al., Reference Pescuma, de Valdez and Mozzi2015; Pires et al., Reference Pires, Marnotes, Rubio, Garcia and Pereira2021). This co-product has a diverse microbiota generally composed of both beneficial bacteria with significant technological importance, but also spoilage microorganisms or even pathogens (Andrighetto et al., Reference Andrighetto, Marcazzan and Lombardi2004; Walsh et al., Reference Walsh, Meade, Mcgill and Fanning2012; Morandi et al., Reference Morandi, Battelli, Silvetti, Goss, Cologna and Brasca2019, Reference Morandi, Cremonesi, Arioli, Stocco, Silvetti, Biscarini, Castiglioni, Greco, D'Ascanio and Mora2022). The whey microbial diversity can be influenced by factors like dairy herd health, milking procedures, environmental hygiene, milk processing and factors related to whey handling, storage, and processing (Murphy et al., Reference Murphy, Martin, Barbano and Wiedmann2016). In addition to beneficial bacteria (such as acid lactic bacteria – LAB), fluid whey can be contaminated by aerobes mesophiles, coliforms, enterobacteria and microorganisms originating from diseased animals (Mycobacterium bovis, Brucella abortus, S. aureus, Coxiella burnetii, Listeria monocytogenes, Salmonella, Streptococcus agalactiae, Streptococcus uberis, and Escherichia coli) or from biofilms attached on equipment, utensils and processing environments (Pseudomonas, Flavobacterium, Enterobacter, Cronobacter, Klebsiella, Acinetobacter, Aeromonas, Alcaligenes, Achromobacter, Corynebacterium, Microbacterium, Micrococcus) (Andrighetto et al., Reference Andrighetto, Marcazzan and Lombardi2004; Vissers and Driehuis, Reference Vissers, Driehuis and Tamime2008; Walsh et al., Reference Walsh, Meade, Mcgill and Fanning2012; Morandi et al., Reference Morandi, Battelli, Silvetti, Goss, Cologna and Brasca2019).

Table 1. Typical composition of sweet and acid whey (Papademas and Kotsaki, Reference Papademas and Kotsaki2019)

Smaller cheese manufacturers who supply fluid whey to industries sometimes do not achieve adequate refrigeration, which may jeopardize the microbiological quality and safety of the whey. Thus, the co-product is subjected to pasteurization to inactivate pathogenic microorganisms, spoilage agents, and enzymes (Lewis and Deeth, Reference Lewis, Deeth and Tamime2008; Kilara, Reference Kilara, Chandan, Kilara and Shah2015). Most vegetative cells are typically destroyed by high-temperature short-time (HTST) treatment from 72 to 75 ºC for 15 to 20 seconds, followed by cooling to 5ºC. If whey is immediately processed through drying or evaporation, refrigeration may be omitted (Brazil, 2020a; Hebishy et al., Reference Hebishy, Yerlikaya, Mahony, Akpinar and Saygili2023). However, some microorganisms may persist in the whey, such those from the groups of thermoduric and thermophilic, represented mainly by Alcaligenes, Microbacterium, Micrococcus, Enterococcus, Streptococcus, Lactobacillus and Corynebacterium, as well as spore-forming bacteria such Bacillus, Geobacillus and Clostridium, which has relevance for the quality and safety of dairy products (Touch and Deeth, Reference Touch, Deeth and Tamime2008). Despite not being able to multiply in dried dairy products, such bacteria can stay viable in dried products for long periods and upon reconstitution they may grow or their respective spores can germinate (Pal et al., Reference Pal, Alemu, Mulu, Karanfil, Parmar and Nayak2016) representing risks for the consumers, mainly for infants.

Walsh et al. (Reference Walsh, Meade, Mcgill and Fanning2012), described the presence of thermoduric bacterial isolates in an Irish WPC process. B. licheniformis, Mic. lacticum, S. warneri, E. durans and B. subtilis were recorded as the predominant microorganisms in the process line, while Mic. phyllosphaerae, Neisseria subflava, Rothia aeria and Strep. mitis were observed in dairy produce or indeed in any food product. Most recently, the rpoB and 16S rRNA genes have emerged as tools to characterize the spore populations of psychrophilic, mesophilic, and thermophilic contaminants present in sweet whey, WPC, non-fat dry milk and acid WPs. Through this approach, researchers identified spores from at least 12 genera, 44 species, and 216 rpoB allelic types, with Bacillus licheniformis, Geobacillus spp. and Anoxybacillus spp. standing out as the predominant ones. Moreover, when comparing spore species obtained from raw materials and the final powdered products, it was observed that while certain species, like B. licheniformis, were present in both the initial materials and the finished powders, other species such as Geobacillus spp. and Anoxybacillus spp. were more commonly detected in the final powdered products (Miller et al., Reference Miller, Kent, Watterson, Boor, Martin and Wiedmann2015). By using metagenomic sequencing, McHugh et al. (Reference McHugh, Feehily, Tobin, Fenelon, Hill and Cotter2018) also identified different groups of mesophilic sporeformers (namely, Bacillus cereus, Bacillus licheniformis, Bacillus paralicheniformis, and a heterogeneous group containing Brevibacillus brevis) in WP produced over 1 year in Ireland.

Anoxybacillus sp. and Geobacillus sp., together with Bacillus sp. are recognized as dominant spores identified in dairy powder products. These Gram-positive, aerobic bacteria produce relatively heat-resistant spores that can be activated by heat shock (Yuan et al., Reference Yuan, Liu, Ren, Zhang, Zhao, Kan, Yang, Ma, Li and Zhang2012; Zain et al., Reference Zain, Flint, Bennett and Tay2016). The occurrence of such spores in WP may represent spoilage potential, but presence of B. cereus can also be considered a concern in terms of safety since such isolates might be capable of causing emetic and enterotoxin food poisoning. Research on clostridial spores in dairy powder products are scarcer, although Clostridium species were already reported in milk powders (Barash et al., Reference Barash, Hsia and Arnon2010; Buehner et al., Reference Buehner, Anand and Djira2015), and the presence of pathogenic C. botulinum and C. perfringens in milk powder is also considered a concern (Pal et al., Reference Pal, Alemu, Mulu, Karanfil, Parmar and Nayak2016). Other microorganisms potentially present in fluid whey, such as Pseudomonas, can lead to the deterioration of the raw material (Vissers and Driehuis, Reference Vissers, Driehuis and Tamime2008) or potentially cause foodborne outbreaks, as in the case of Salmonella, L. monocytogenes, C. sakazakii, and S. aureus (Ünüvar, Reference Ünüvar, Holban and Grumezescu2018). A common factor among these microorganisms is their vulnerability to heat treatments applied during fluid whey processing (Al-Holy et al., Reference Al-Holy, Al-Nabulsi, Osaili, Ayyash and Shaker2012; Necidová et al., Reference Necidová, Bursová, Haruštiaková, Bogdanovičová and Lačanin2019). However, the presence of S. aureus in fluid whey is a concern, given its ability to produce heat-resistant enterotoxins (Necidová et al., Reference Necidová, Bursová, Haruštiaková, Bogdanovičová and Lačanin2019).

According to Schwabe et al. (Reference Schwabe, Notermans, Boot, Tatini and Krämer1990), the thermal inactivation of SEs varies based on the food matrix and pH. Assessing the impact of heat treatment on enterotoxin activity is challenging, as it depends on the type of enterotoxin and the concentration in the food matrix. European law establishes criteria for coagulase-positive staphylococci cheeses, milk powder and whey powder. If the counts exceed 105 cfu/g, the batch must be tested for the presence of SEs, which must be absent in 25 g of the products (European Commission, 2005). Brazilian Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Production (in Portuguese, Ministério da Agricultura e Pecuária) also establishes microbiological criteria for WP production, including the counting of viable mesophilic aerobes (≤ 105 cfu/g), total coliforms at 30-35 ºC (≤ 100 cfu/g), thermotolerant coliforms at 45 ºC (≤ 10 cfu/g), coagulase-positive staphylococci (≤ 100 cfu/g), Salmonella spp. (absence/25 g) (Brazil, 2020a). In addition, once available for commercialization, WP must meet the microbiological standards established by National Health Surveillance Agency (in Portuguese: Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária: Brazil, 2022) which determines the counting of viable mesophilic aerobes (≤ 105 cfu/g), coagulase-positive staphylococci (≤ 100 cfu/g), and absence of Salmonella spp., Enterobacteriaceae and SEs.

The potential risk of S. Aureus and SEs in whey and whey powder

Powdered milk is not sterile and has the potential to harbor diverse bacteria, including toxin producing pathogens (Bogdanovičová et al., Reference Bogdanovičová, Necidová, Haruštiaková and Janštová2017). S. aureus is a Gram-positive bacteria, mesophilic cocci with a multiplication temperature in the range of 7 to 48 ºC. The general survive features of this bacteria are pH limits between 4.2 and 9.3, minimum water activity of 0.85, and ability to survive in environments with up to 25% NaCl concentration. These immobile bacteria exhibit a diameter ranging from 0.5 to 1.5 µm and do not produce spores. They can be found in isolation, pairs, short chains, or clusters (Bennett et al., Reference Bennett, Hait, Tallent, Labbé and García2013; Bhunia, Reference Bhunia and Bhunia2018). S. aureus is a pathogen of great concern in food due to the ability of certain strains to produce heat-stable SEs that, once ingested, can lead to symptoms of gastrointestinal disorders, such as vomiting, nausea and abdominal cramps (Bennett et al., Reference Bennett, Hait, Tallent, Labbé and García2013; Landgraf and Destro, Reference Landgraf, Destro, Morris and Potter2013). Despite notable improvements in food safety procedures, SEs still figure as one of the main causes of foodborne outbreaks worldwide (Grispoldi et al., Reference Grispoldi, Karama, Armani, Hadjicharalambous and Cenci-Goga2021; Hu et al., Reference Hu, Li, Fang and Ono2021).

From 2013 to 2022, S. aureus was listed as the main agent of reported outbreaks of food poisoning in Brazil, ranking third among pathogenic bacteria, behind E. coli and Salmonella spp. During this period, the Health Surveillance Secretariat reported a total of 6,523 outbreaks of foodborne diseases, affecting 107,513 individuals and resulting in 112 fatalities. Of these outbreaks, in 1,571 (24.08%) it was possible to specify the causative agents and Staphylococcus spp. was identified as the etiological agent in 170 (10.8%) outbreaks (Brazil, 2023). In a more detailed report, from 2016 to 2019, 2,504 outbreaks of foodborne diseases were identified, and information was present regarding the type of food involved for 894 cases (35.7%), with milk and dairy products responsible for 81 (9.06%) of these cases (Brazil, 2020b). However, the actual number could be significantly higher due to the underreporting of isolated cases.

Food poisoning caused by S. aureus typically occurs shortly after the ingestion of food contaminated with preformed toxins at concentration above 1 ng/g of food (Landgraf and Destro, Reference Landgraf, Destro, Morris and Potter2013; Bhunia, Reference Bhunia and Bhunia2018). In a study conducted by Bogdanovičová et al. (Reference Bogdanovičová, Necidová, Haruštiaková and Janštová2017), the possibility of survival and growth of S. aureus in milk powder after its reconstitution was evaluated. Powdered milk was inoculated with 102 to 105 cfu/g of enterotoxigenic S. aureus and the reconstituted milk was stored for 48 h at 4, 15 and 25 ºC. The multiplication of S. aureus as well as the production of SEA, SEB and SEC enterotoxins was regularly detected, and at the higher temperature and inoculum concentration, pathogen growth and enterotoxin detection were greater (Bogdanovičová et al., Reference Bogdanovičová, Necidová, Haruštiaková and Janštová2017), demonstrating the risk that WP contamination could pose to consumers. The presence of staphylococci in a WP plant was examined and S. aureus was identified, originating from three powder residue samples from the working floor near filling devices. On the other hand, S. aureus was not present in air samples, but S. saprophyticus and S. xylosus were isolated. In addition, before the study was started, it was discovered that the WP contained a small number of S. aureus of a specific phage type, distinct from any isolates detected within the production line or its environment. Eight months later, S. aureus isolates from a site previously found to be contaminated, were of different phage types (Kleiss et al., Reference Kleiss, van Schothorst, Cordier and Untermann1994).

Wang et al. (Reference Wang, Meng, Zhang, Zhou, Zhang, Yang, Xi and Xia2012) evaluated samples of powdered infant formula milk and showed that 11.2% of them were positive for enterotoxigenic S. aureus. Even if these enterotoxigenic S. aureus-contaminated infant foods are reconstituted at low temperatures and subsequently stored at room temperature for extended durations, they still pose a health risk to children. Asao et al. (Reference Asao, Kumeda, Kawai, Shibata, Oda, Haruki, Nakazawa and Kozaki2003) documented a significant outbreak in Japan linked to the ingestion of reconstituted milk tainted with staphylococcal enterotoxin A. On the other hand, Cho et al. (Reference Cho, Kim, Kim, Park, Kwon J, Kim, Lee and Rhee2018) conducted a study of the microbial composition of powdered infant formula along the manufacturing processes and no presumptive colony for Cronobacter spp., Salmonella spp., and S. aureus was detected. B. cereus was the only detected bacteria, which also represents a concern.

In general, SEs exhibit resistance to freezing, drying and heat treatments, such as 100 ºC, 110 ºC, and 121 ºC for 3 min. This suggests that conventional thermal processing techniques might not be sufficient to entirely eliminate the threat posed by S. aureus in milk and dairy products (Guanhong et al., Reference Guanhong, Zonghong, Yao, Xu, Ting and Xin2023). Necidová et al. (Reference Necidová, Janštová and Karpíšková2012) demonstrated that the multiplication rates of S. aureus and the production of SEs in brain heart infusion culture medium and milk sources differ significantly. The culture medium often showed higher S. aureus counts and increased SE production compared to the food matrix. This raises the question of how the food matrix might impact the thermal stability and inactivation of enterotoxins. To investigate this further, Necidová et al. (Reference Necidová, Bursová, Haruštiaková, Bogdanovičová and Lačanin2019) assessed the effect of heat treatment on the activity of SEs of type A, B, and C in milk. A total of 38 S. aureus strains capable of producing SEA, SEB, or SEC were subjected to heat treatment at 100, 110 and 121 ºC for 3 min. Prior to heat treatment, all samples were positive for SE production. However, after heat treatment, positive rates of decrease were obtained, being 36.8%, 34.2%, and 31.6% at 100, 110 and 121ºC, respectively. The reduction in positive samples differed according to the type of enterotoxin, with SEA being detected in higher amounts before and after heat treatment. Notably, the SE concentrations decreased significantly after heat treatment, leading to the conclusion that the success of SE inactivation depends on the initial concentration present before heat treatment.

Among the foods that cause outbreaks and staphylococcal intoxications, raw milk, pasteurized milk and cheese are noteworthy, with S. aureus frequently associated in epidemiological investigations (Kümmel et al., Reference Kümmel, Stessl, Gonano, Walcher, Bereuter, Fricker, Grunert, Wagner and Ehling-Schulz2016; Hu et al., Reference Hu, Wang, Fang, Okamura, Ono and Fetsch2018; Gajewska et al., Reference Gajewska, Chajęcka-Wierzchowska and Zadernowska2022; Zhang et al., Reference Zhang, Wang, Jin, Li, Zhang, Shi and Zhao2022). Considering that the fluid whey used in WP production predominantly originates from cheese manufacturing, where S. aureus and SE are recurrent, and considering that such microbiological criteria are applied to WP, monitoring S. aureus and associated SEs must be performed in WP, in order to avoid food poisoning outbreaks involving food that include WP in their formulations.

S. aureus can multiply within temperatures ranging from 7 to 48ºC, with optimum growth at 35-37 ºC, demanding adequate refrigeration when the whey is subjected to storage before processing in order to inhibit its multiplication and subsequent production of SEs (Hu et al., Reference Hu, Wang, Fang, Okamura, Ono and Fetsch2018). In a study performed by Halpin-Dohnalek and Marth (Reference Halpin-Dohnalek and Marth1989), fresh cheddar cheese whey was inoculated with S. aureus at 106 cfu/ml and held at 4, 25 and 37 ºC for 48 h; the number of staphylococci increased in whey at 25 and 37 ºC and decreased or remained constant in whey at 4 ºC, revealing the importance of low temperature before the processing of this co-product.

In addition to avoiding growth of S. aureus in the whey, if the concentrated mixture becomes recontaminated by S. aureus at any post-pasteurization phase, the conditions of crystallization can inadvertently lead to an increase in the pathogen population and potentially production of SEs, although studies are needed to clearly demonstrate this. This is important because S. aureus is well known for its ability to produce biofilms and persist within food processing facilities, which may allow cross-contamination to foods and turn sanitization procedures ineffective, as chemicals may not reach inside the biofilm at necessary concentrations (Lee et al., Reference Lee, Mangolin, Gonçalves, Neeff, Silva, Cruz and Oliveira2014; Idrees et al., Reference Idrees, Sawant, Karodia and Rahman2021). Toté et al. (Reference Toté, Horemans, Berghe, Maes and Cos2010) evaluated the inhibitory effect of different biocides on the biofilm of S. aureus. Among those analyzed, sodium hypochlorite and peracetic acid were the most effective in reducing the viability of both the biofilm matrix and the viable mass. Furthermore, Meira et al. (Reference Meira, de Medeiros Barbosa, Aguiar Athayde, de Siqueira-júnior and de Souza2012) explored the adhesion, kinetics of detachment, and development of biofilms by S. aureus isolates from food service surfaces on both stainless steel and polypropylene surfaces, as well as the effectiveness of peracetic acid (30 mg/L) and sodium hypochlorite (250 mg/L) in removing bacterial cells from the preformed biofilm matrix. The isolates showed high ability to adhere and form biofilm on the tested surfaces when immersed in a food-based broth at 7 and 28 °C. While both disinfectants reduced the number of adhered cells, they were not entirely successful in completely removing the viable cells of S. aureus forming a mature biofilm.

The removal of biofilms from within the crystallizer holds special significance, as adhered S. aureus cells can detach and reintroduce contamination to the concentrated mixture. Once the lactose crystallization stage is completed, the product is dehydrated using spray drying, a process that involves the dispersion of the mixture into small droplets under a stream of hot air at 160 to 200 ºC (da Silva et al., Reference da Silva, Martins, Silveira, Simeão, Mendes, ÍT, Schuck and de Carvalho2017). The extensive surface area of the droplets and the elevated temperatures of the drying air result in rapid dehydration (Schuck, Reference Schuck and Corredig2009). Despite the high temperature of the drying air, the droplets themselves reach relatively low temperatures (around 40 ºC). Consequently, spray drying is not a procedure that can be associated with the thermal elimination of microorganisms. Therefore, the microbial population within the concentrate containing crystallized lactose may not be substantially reduced, remaining potentially viable in powder form. In addition, thermoresistant SEs can persist despite the spray drying process (Tatini, Reference Tatini1976; Emiliano et al., Reference Emiliano, Martins, Freitas, Carvalho and Perrone2022). In this way, the microbial quality of the initial fluid whey (raw material) and the management of recontamination risks during processing are essential to ensure the safety of WP.

The microbiological quality of WPs is intricately linked to the microbial content initially present in the raw material, as well as to the possibility of contamination during and processing. This review highlights the need for more research to assess the microbiological integrity of WP, especially in Brazil, where the production of WP has been growing in recent years (Lopes et al., Reference Lopes, Guimarães and Ribeiro2023). Given the increasing use of WP as an ingredient for various food products and its global economic significance, continuous surveillance for the presence of spoilage microbiota and potential pathogens, including S. aureus and associated SEs, is indispensable to prevent potential outbreaks linked to the consumption of products containing WP in their formulation.

Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful to Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES, Brasília, DF, Brazil, Finance code 001), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq, Brasília, DF, Brazil), and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais (FAPEMIG, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil).

References

Al-Holy, MA, Al-Nabulsi, A, Osaili, TM, Ayyash, MM and Shaker, RR (2012) Inactivation of Listeria innocua in brined white cheese by a combination of nisin and heat. Food Control 23, 4853.10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.06.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Tayawi, AN, Sisay, EJ, Beszédes, S and Kertész, S (2023) Wastewater treatment in the dairy industry from classical treatment to promising technologies: an overview. Processes 11, 2133.10.3390/pr11072133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alves, CSJ, Floriano, SAM, Voltarelli, VP, de Rensis, CMVB, Pimentel, TC, Costa, GN and Vianna, PCB (2020) Effect of carbonation and probiotic addition on the physicochemical, microbiological and sensory characteristics of whey dairy beverage. Journal of Dairy Research 87, 255258.10.1017/S0022029920000291CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alves, MP, De Oliveira Moreira, R, Rodrigues Júnior, PH, Martins Mc de, F, Tuler Perrone, ÍT and Fernandes, DCA (2014) Soro de leite: tecnologias para processamento de coprodutor. Revista Do Instituto de Laticínios Cândido Tostes 69, 212226.10.14295/2238-6416.v69i3.341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alves, VF, Niño-Arias, FC, Pitondo-Silva, A, de Araújo Frazilio, D, de Oliveira Gonçalves, L, Chaul Toubas, L, Sapateiro Torres, IM, Oxaran, V, Dittmann, KK and De Martinis, ECP (2018) Molecular characterisation of Staphylococcus aureus from some artisanal Brazilian dairies. International Dairy Journal 85, 247253.10.1016/j.idairyj.2018.06.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, PHR and Stone, DM (1955) Staphylococcal food poisoning associated with spray-dried milk. Journal of Hygiene (London) 53, 387397.Google ScholarPubMed
Andrighetto, C, Marcazzan, G and Lombardi, A (2004) Use of RAPD‐PCR and TTGE for the evaluation of biodiversity of whey cultures for Grana Padano cheese. Letters in Applied Microbiology 38, 400405.10.1111/j.1472-765X.2004.01504.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andritsos, ND and Mataragas, M (2023) Characterization and antibiotic resistance of Listeria monocytogenes strains isolated from Greek Myzithra soft whey cheese and related food processing surfaces over two-and-a-half years of safety monitoring in a cheese processing facility. Foods 12, 1200.10.3390/foods12061200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armijo, R, Henderson, DA, Timothee, R, Robinson, HB and Fapha, O (1957) Food poisoning outbreaks associated with spray-dried milk: an epidemiologic study. American Journal of Public Health and the Nations Health 47, 10931100.10.2105/AJPH.47.9.1093CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Asao, T, Kumeda, Y, Kawai, T, Shibata, T, Oda, H, Haruki, K, Nakazawa, H and Kozaki, S (2003) An extensive outbreak of staphylococcal food poisoning due to low-fat milk in Japan: estimation of enterotoxin A in the incriminated milk and powdered skim milk. Epidemiology & Infection 130, 3340.10.1017/S0950268802007951CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baldasso, C, Silvestre, WP, Silveira, N, Vanin, AP, Cardozo, NSM and Tessaro, IC (2022) Ultrafiltration and diafiltration modeling for improved whey protein purification. Separation Science and Technology 57, 19261935.10.1080/01496395.2021.2021424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ballatore, MB, Bettiol M, DR, Vanden Braber, NL, Aminahuel, CA, Rossi, YE, Petroselli, G, Erra-Balsells, R, Cavaglieri, LR and Montenegro, MA (2020) Antioxidant and cytoprotective effect of peptides produced by hydrolysis of whey protein concentrate with trypsin. Food Chemistry 319, 126472.10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.126472CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barash, JR, Hsia, JK and Arnon, SS (2010) Presence of soil-dwelling Clostridia in commercial powdered infant formulas. The Journal of Pediatrics 156, 402408.10.1016/j.jpeds.2009.09.072CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
BCC Research (2023) Global Market for Membrane Microfiltration. Available at https://www.bccresearch.com/market-research/membrane-and-separation-technology/membrane-microfiltration.html (accessed 08 September 2023).Google Scholar
Bennett, RW, Hait, JM and Tallent, SM (2013) Staphylococcus aureus. In Labbé, RG and García, S (eds.), Guide to Foodborne Pathogens (Second Edition). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, pp 2644.10.1002/9781118684856.ch2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhunia, AK (2018) Staphylococcus aureus. In Bhunia, AK (ed.), Foodborne Microbial Pathogens: mechanisms and Pathogenesis. New York, NY: Springer, New York: 181192.10.1007/978-1-4939-7349-1_10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhushan, S and Etzel, MR (2009) Charged ultrafiltration membranes increase the selectivity of whey protein separations. Journal of Food Science 74, 131139.10.1111/j.1750-3841.2009.01095.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bogdanovičová, K, Necidová, L, Haruštiaková, D and Janštová, B (2017) Milk powder risk assessment with Staphylococcus aureus toxigenic strains. Food Control 73, 27.10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.07.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Božanić, R, Barukčić, I, Jakopović, KL and Tratnik, L (2014) Possibilities of Whey Utilisation. Austin Journal of Nutrition and Food Sciences 2, 1036.Google Scholar
Brazil (2020a) Ministério Da Agricultura, Pecuária E Abastecimento. Instrução Normativa N. 80, de 13 de Agosto de 2020. Aprova O Regulamento Técnico Que Fixa Os Padrões de Identidade E Qualidade Para O Soro de Leite E O Soro de Leite Ácido. Brasília, Brasil: Diário Oficial da União. DF, 17/08/2020, seção 1.Google Scholar
Brazil (2020b) Ministério da Saúde. Informe sobre surtos notificados de doenças transmitidas por água e alimentos – brasil, 2016-2019. Boletim Epidemiológico N 32(51), 135.Google Scholar
Brazil (2022) Ministério Da Saúde. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária. Instrução Normativa ANVISA N° 161, de 1o de Julho de 2022. Estabelece Os Padrões Microbiológicos Dos Alimentos. Brasília, Brasil: Diário Oficial da União, DF, 06/07 /2022.seção1Google Scholar
Brazil (2023) Ministério da Saúde. Surtos de Doenças de Transmissão Hídrica e Alimentar no Brasil. Informe 2023 1, 116.Google Scholar
Buchanan, D, Martindale, W, Romeih, E and Hebishy, E (2023) Recent advances in whey processing and valorisation: technological and environmental perspectives. International Journal of Dairy Technology 76, 291312.10.1111/1471-0307.12935CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buehner, KP, Anand, S and Djira, GD (2015) Prevalence of thermoduric bacteria and spores in nonfat dry milk powders of Midwest origin. Journal of Dairy Science 98, 28612866.10.3168/jds.2014-8822CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carić, M, Akkerman, JC, Milanović, S, Kentish, SE and Tamime, AY (2009) Technology of evaporators, membrane processing and dryers. In Tamime, AY (ed.), Dairy Powders and Concentrated Products (First Edition). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, pp 99148.10.1002/9781444322729.ch3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castro-Muñoz, R, Boczkaj, G, Gontarek, E, Cassano, A and Fíla, V (2020) Membrane technologies assisting plant-based and agro-food by-products processing: a comprehensive review. Trends in Food Science and Technology 95, 219232.10.1016/j.tifs.2019.12.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, TJ, Kim, HW, Kim, NH, Park, SM, Kwon J, Il, Kim, YJ, Lee, KW and Rhee, MS (2018) New insights into the thermophilic spore-formers in powdered infant formula: implications of changes in microbial composition during manufacture. Food Control 92, 464470.10.1016/j.foodcont.2018.05.036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Codex Alimentarius (1995) CODEX Standard for Whey Powders. CODEX STAN 289-1995. International Food Standards. Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Costa, MA, Kuhn, D, Rama, GR, Lehn, DN and Souza, CFVD (2022) Whey butter: a promising perspective for the dairy industry. Brazilian Journal of Food Technology 25, e2021088.10.1590/1981-6723.08821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, NR, Cappato, LP, Ferreira, MVS, Pires, RPS, Moraes, J, Esmerino, EA, Silva, R, Neto, RPC, Tavares, MIB, Freitas, MQ et al. (2018) Ohmic Heating: a potential technology for sweet whey processing. Food Research International 106, 771779.10.1016/j.foodres.2018.01.046CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
da Silva Cândido, TJ, da Silva, AC, de Matos, LG, da Silva Do Nascimento, M, Camargo, CH, Cobo Zanella, R, Mores Rall, VL and Cirone Silva, NC (2020) Enterotoxigenic potential and molecular typing of Staphylococcus sp. isolated from organic and conventional fresh minas cheese in the state of São Paulo, Brazil. International Dairy Journal 102, 104605.10.1016/j.idairyj.2019.104605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
da Silva, CR, Martins, E, Silveira, ACP, Simeão, M, Mendes, AL, ÍT, P, Schuck, P and de Carvalho, AF (2017) Thermodynamic characterization of single-stage spray dryers: mass and energy balances for milk drying. Drying Technology 35, 17911798.10.1080/07373937.2016.1275675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deddefo, A, Mamo, G, Asfaw, M and Amenu, K (2023) Factors affecting the microbiological quality and contamination of farm bulk milk by Staphylococcus aureus in dairy farms in Asella, Ethiopia. BMC Microbiology 23, 65.10.1186/s12866-022-02746-0CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duarte, RV, Lopes-da-silva, JA, Gomes, AM, Delgadillo, I, Barba, FJ and Saraiva, JA (2023) Improving fresh cheese shelf-life through hyperbaric storage at variable room temperature. Journal of Food Science 88, 391402.10.1111/1750-3841.16393CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elkot, WF, Elmahdy, A, El-Sawah, TH, Alghamdia, OA, Alhag, SK, Al-Shahari, EA, AL-Farga, A and Ismail, HA (2024) Development and characterization of a novel flavored functional fermented whey-based sports beverage fortified with Spirulina platensis. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules 258, 128999.10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.128999CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emiliano, JVDS, Martins, E, Freitas, RD, Carvalho, AFD and Perrone, ÍT (2022) Assessment of the development of Staphylococcus aureus during the production of soro on a laboratory scale. Research, Society and Development 11, e254111022450.10.33448/rsd-v11i10.22450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Commission (2005) Commission regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs. Official Journal of European Commission 338, 126.Google Scholar
Eurostat (2020) Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery Statistics. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
Gajewska, J, Chajęcka-Wierzchowska, W and Zadernowska, A (2022) Occurrence and characteristics of Staphylococcus aureus strains along the production chain of raw Milk cheeses in Poland. Molecules 27, 734.10.3390/molecules27196569CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gonzalez, AGM, Marques, LMP, Gomes, M da SA, Beltrão JC do C, , Pinheiro, MG, Esper, LMR, Paula, GR de, Teixeira, LA and Aguiar-Alves, F (2017) Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in minas frescal cheese: evaluation of classic enterotoxin genes, antimicrobial resistance and clonal diversity. FEMS Microbiology Letters 364, fnx232.10.1093/femsle/fnx232CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grispoldi, L, Karama, M, Armani, A, Hadjicharalambous, C and Cenci-Goga, BT (2021) Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxin in food of animal origin and staphylococcal food poisoning risk assessment from farm to table. Italian Journal of Animal Science 20, 677690.10.1080/1828051X.2020.1871428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guanhong, C, Zonghong, L, Yao, Z, Xu, X, Ting, Z and Xin, W (2023) Effect and mechanism of eliminating Staphylococcus aureus by electron beam irradiation and reducing the toxicity of its metabolites. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 89, e0207522.Google Scholar
Guiné, RPF, Florença, SG, Barroca, MJ and Anjos, O (2020) The link between the consumer and the innovations in food product development. Foods 9, 1317.10.3390/foods9091317CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halpin-Dohnalek, MI and Marth, EH (1989) Fate of Staphylococcus aureus in whey, whey cream, and whey cream butter. Journal of Dairy Science 72, 31493155.10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(89)79473-XCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hebishy, E, Yerlikaya, O, Mahony, J, Akpinar, A and Saygili, D (2023) Microbiological aspects and challenges of whey powders – i thermoduric, thermophilic and spore-forming bacteria. International Journal of Dairy Technology 76, 779800.10.1111/1471-0307.13006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howden, BP, Giulieri, SG, Wong Fok Lung, T, Baines, SL, Sharkey, LK, Lee, JYH, Hachani, A, Monk, IR and Stinear, TP (2023) Staphylococcus aureus host interactions and adaptation. Nature Reviews, Microbiology 21, 380395.10.1038/s41579-023-00852-yCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hu, D-L, Li, S, Fang, R and Ono, HK (2021) Update on molecular diversity and multipathogenicity of staphylococcal superantigen toxins. Animal Diseases 1, 7.10.1186/s44149-021-00007-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, D-L, Wang, L, Fang, R, Okamura, M and Ono, HK (2018) Chapter 3 - Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxins. In Fetsch, A (ed.), Staphylococcus Aureus. San Diego: Academic Press, 3955.10.1016/B978-0-12-809671-0.00003-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Idrees, M, Sawant, S, Karodia, N and Rahman, A (2021) Staphylococcus aureus biofilm: morphology, genetics, pathogenesis and treatment strategies. International Journal of Environmental Research & Public Health 18, 7602.10.3390/ijerph18147602CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, P (2019) Manufacture of whey protein products: concentrates, isolate, whey protein fractions and microparticulated. In Deeth, HC and Bansal, N (eds.), Whey Proteins: From Milk to Medicine (First Edition). London, UK: Academic Press, pp 97122.10.1016/B978-0-12-812124-5.00003-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilara, A (2015) Whey and whey products. In Chandan, RC, Kilara, A and Shah, NP (eds.), Dairy Processing and Quality Assurance (Second Edition). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, pp 349366.10.1002/9781118810279.ch15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilara, A and Vaghela, MN (2018) Whey proteins. In Yada, RY (ed.), Proteins in Food Processing (Second Edition). Cambridge, UK: Woodhead Publishing, pp 93126.10.1016/B978-0-08-100722-8.00005-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleiss, T, van Schothorst, M, Cordier, J-L and Untermann, F (1994) Staphylococci in a whey powder plant environment: an ecological survey as a contribution to HACCP studies. Food Control 5, 196199.10.1016/0956-7135(94)90083-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kravtsov, VA, Kulikova, IK, Anisimov, GS, Evdokimov, IA and Khramtsov, AG (2021) Variety of dairy ultrafiltration permeates and their purification in lactose production. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. IOP Publishing Ltd.10.1088/1755-1315/677/3/032001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kümmel, J, Stessl, B, Gonano, M, Walcher, G, Bereuter, O, Fricker, M, Grunert, T, Wagner, M and Ehling-Schulz, M (2016) Staphylococcus aureus entrance into the dairy chain: tracking S. aureus from dairy cow to cheese. Frontiers in Microbiology 7, 1603.10.3389/fmicb.2016.01603CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kurnick, JV, Michellim, MGG, Yada, RY, Junior, BR and Tribst, AAL (2024) Development of value-added beverages using sheep and goat cheese whey and secondary whey. International Dairy Journal 152, 105886.10.1016/j.idairyj.2024.105886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landgraf, M and Destro, MT (2013) Chapter 28 - Staphylococcal food poisoning. Morris, JG and Potter, ME (eds.), Foodborne Infections and Intoxications (Fourth Edition). San Diego: Academic Press, 389400.10.1016/B978-0-12-416041-5.00028-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavelli, V and Beccalli, MP (2022) Cheese whey recycling in the perspective of the circular economy: modeling processes and the supply chain to design the involvement of the small and medium enterprises. Trends in Food Science and Technology 126, 8698.10.1016/j.tifs.2022.06.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, SHI, Mangolin, BLC, Gonçalves, JL, Neeff, DV, Silva, MP, Cruz, AG and Oliveira, CAF (2014) Biofilm-producing ability of Staphylococcus aureus isolates from Brazilian dairy farms. Journal of Dairy Science 97, 18121816.10.3168/jds.2013-7387CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, MJ and Deeth, HC (2008) Heat treatment of milk. In Tamime, AY (ed.), Milk Processing and Quality Management (First Edition). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, pp 168204.10.1002/9781444301649.ch7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lopes, ETSV, Guimarães, DGF and Ribeiro, LF (2023) Soro de leite: de subproduto a coproduto nas insdustrias de laticínios. Revista GeTeC - Gestão, Tecnologia E Ciências 12, 110114.Google Scholar
Martin, JGP, de Oliveira E Silva, G, da Fonseca, CR, Morales, CB, Souza Pamplona Silva, C, Miquelluti, DL and Porto, E (2016) Efficiency of a cleaning protocol for the removal of enterotoxigenic Staphylococcus aureus strains in dairy plants. International Journal of Food Microbiology 238, 295301.10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2016.09.018CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McHugh, AJ, Feehily, C, Tobin, JT, Fenelon, MA, Hill, C and Cotter, PD (2018) Mesophilic sporeformers identified in whey powder by using shotgun metagenomic sequencing. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 84, e0130518.10.1128/AEM.01305-18CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mehli, L, Hoel, S, Thomassen, GMB, Jakobsen, AN and Karlsen, H (2017) The prevalence, genetic diversity and antibiotic resistance of Staphylococcus aureus in milk, whey, and cheese from artisan farm dairies. International Dairy Journal 65, 2027.10.1016/j.idairyj.2016.10.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meira, QGDS, de Medeiros Barbosa, I, Aguiar Athayde, AJA, de Siqueira-júnior, JP and de Souza, EL (2012) Influence of temperature and surface kind on biofilm formation by Staphylococcus aureus from food-contact surfaces and sensitivity to sanitizers. Food Control 25, 469475.10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.11.030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, JS and Ledford, RA (1977) Potential for growth of enterotoxigenic staphylococci in cheddar cheese whey. Journal of Dairy Science 60, 16891692.10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(77)84091-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, RA, Kent, DJ, Watterson, MJ, Boor, KJ, Martin, NH and Wiedmann, M (2015) Spore populations among bulk tank raw milk and dairy powders are significantly different. Journal of Dairy Science 98, 84928504.10.3168/jds.2015-9943CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morandi, S, Battelli, G, Silvetti, T, Goss, A, Cologna, N and Brasca, M (2019) How the biodiversity loss in natural whey culture is affecting ripened cheese quality? The case of Trentingrana cheese. Lwt 115, 108480.10.1016/j.lwt.2019.108480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morandi, S, Cremonesi, P, Arioli, S, Stocco, G, Silvetti, T, Biscarini, F, Castiglioni, B, Greco, Ç, D'Ascanio, V, Mora, D et al. (2022) Effect of using mycotoxin-detoxifying agents in dairy cattle feed on natural whey starter biodiversity. Journal of Dairy Science 105, 65136526.10.3168/jds.2022-21793CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murphy, SC, Martin, NH, Barbano, DM and Wiedmann, M (2016) Influence of raw milk quality on processed dairy products: how do raw milk quality test results relate to product quality and yield? Journal of Dairy Science 99, 1012810149.10.3168/jds.2016-11172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Necidová, L, Bursová, Š, Haruštiaková, D, Bogdanovičová, K and Lačanin, I (2019) Effect of heat treatment on activity of staphylococcal enterotoxins of type A, B, and C in milk. Journal of Dairy Science 102, 39243932.10.3168/jds.2018-15255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Necidová, L, Janštová, B and Karpíšková, R (2012) Dynamics of staphylococcal enterotoxin production in model experiments simulating the fresh cheese environment. Acta Veterinaria Brunensis 81, 391396.10.2754/avb201281040391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nunes, MM and Caldas, ED (2017) Preliminary quantitative microbial risk assessment for Staphylococcus enterotoxins in fresh Minas cheese, a popular food in Brazil. Food Control 73, 524531.10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.08.046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Donoghue, LT and Murphy, EG (2023) Nondairy food applications of whey and milk permeates: direct and indirect uses. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety 22, 26522677.10.1111/1541-4337.13157CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ozel, B, McClements, DJ, Arikan, C, Kaner, O and Oztop, MH (2022) Challenges in dried whey powder production: quality problems. Food Research International 160, 111682.10.1016/j.foodres.2022.111682CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pal, M, Alemu, J, Mulu, S, Karanfil, O, Parmar, B and Nayak, JB (2016) Microbial and hygienic aspects of dry milk powder. Beverage and Food World 43, 2831.Google Scholar
Papademas, P and Kotsaki, P (2019) Technological utilization of whey towards sustainable exploitation. Advances in Dairy Research 7, 231.Google Scholar
Pescuma, M, de Valdez, GF and Mozzi, F (2015) Whey-derived valuable products obtained by microbial fermentation. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 99, 61836196.10.1007/s00253-015-6766-zCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pires, AF, Marnotes, NG, Rubio, OD, Garcia, AC and Pereira, CD (2021) Dairy by-products: a review on the valorization of whey and second cheese whey. Foods 10, 1067.10.3390/foods10051067CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Price, J (2019) History of the development and application of whey protein products. In Deeth, HC and Bansal, N (eds.), Whey Proteins: From Milk to Medicine (First Edition). London, UK: Academic Press, pp 5195.10.1016/B978-0-12-812124-5.00002-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reig, M, Vecino, X and Cortina, JL (2021) Use of membrane technologies in dairy industry: an overview. Foods 10, 2768.10.3390/foods10112768CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rice, G, Kentish, S, Vivekanand, V, O'Connor, A, Stevens, G and Barber, A (2005) Membrane-based dairy separation: a comparison of nanofiltration and electrodialysis. Developments in Chemical Engineering and Mineral Processing 13, 4354.10.1002/apj.5500130105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santos, HCM, Maranduba, HL, de Almeida Neto, JA and Rodrigues, LB (2017) Life cycle assessment of cheese production process in a small-sized dairy industry in Brazil. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 24, 34703482.10.1007/s11356-016-8084-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuck, P (2009) Understanding the factors affecting spray-dried dairy powder properties and behaviour. In Corredig, M (ed.), Dairy-Derived Ingredients. Cambridge, UK: Woodhead Publishing, pp 2450.10.1533/9781845697198.1.24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwabe, M, Notermans, S, Boot, R, Tatini, SR and Krämer, J (1990) Inactivation of staphylococcal enterotoxins by heat and reactivation by high pH treatment. International Journal of Food Microbiology 10, 3342.10.1016/0168-1605(90)90005-PCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silva, MP, Carvalho, AF, Andretta, M and Nero, LA (2021) Presence and growth prediction of Staphylococcus sand Staphylococcus aureus in Minas Frescal cheese, a soft fresh cheese produced in Brazil. Journal of Dairy Science 104, 1231212320.10.3168/jds.2021-20633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simeão, M, DA Silva, CR, Stephani, R, de Oliveira, LFC, Schuck, P, de Carvalho, AF and Perrone, ÍT (2018) Lactose crystallisation in concentrated whey: the influence of vat type. International Journal of Dairy Technology 71, 478483.10.1111/1471-0307.12455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Souza, MAM, da Silva, GC, Lopes, U, Rosa, JN, Bazzolli, DMS and Pimentel-Filho, NDJ (2024) Characterisation of Staphylococcus aureus isolated from artisanal unripened cheeses produced in São Paulo State, Brazil. International Dairy Journal 149, 105825.10.1016/j.idairyj.2023.105825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tabelini, DB, Lima, JPP, Borges, AC and Aguiar, A (2023) A review on the characteristics and methods of dairy industry wastewater treatment in the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil. Journal of Water Process Engineering 53, 103779.10.1016/j.jwpe.2023.103779CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tatini, SR (1976) Thermal Stability of Enterotoxins in Food. Journal of Food Protection 39, 432438.Google Scholar
Tebbouche, L, Aziza, M, Abada, S, Chergui, A, Amrane, A and Hellal, A (2024) Bioethanol production from deproteinized cheese whey powder by local strain isolated from soured milk: influence of operating parameters. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects 46, 397408.10.1080/15567036.2023.2284851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, P, García, P, Miles, J, Isla, D, Yáñez, C, Santibáñez, R, Núñez, A, Flores-Yáñez, C, Del Río, C and Cuadra, F (2022) Isolation and identification of Staphylococcus species obtained from fealthy companion animals and humans. Veterinary Sciences 9, 79.10.3390/vetsci9020079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toté, K, Horemans, T, Berghe, DV, Maes, L and Cos, P (2010) Inhibitory effect of biocides on the biable masses and matrices of Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 76, 31353142.10.1128/AEM.02095-09CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Touch, V and Deeth, HC (2008) Microbiology of raw and market milks. In Tamime, AY (ed.), Milk Processing and Quality Management (First Edition). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, pp 4871.10.1002/9781444301649.ch3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trindade, MB, Soares, BCV, Scudding, H, Guimarães, JT, Esmerino, EA, Freitas, MQ, Pimentel, TC, Silva, MC, Souza, SLQ, Almada, RB et al. (2019) Cheese whey exploitation in Brazil: a questionnaire survey. Food Science and Technology 39, 788791.10.1590/fst.07419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsermoula, P, Khakimov, B, Nielsen, JH and Engelsen, SB (2021) Whey - The waste-stream that became more valuable than the food product. Trends in Food Science and Technology 118, 230241.10.1016/j.tifs.2021.08.025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuler Perrone, I, Schuck, P, Caldas Pereira Silveira, A and Fernandes de Carvalho A, 2016) Soro de leite em pó: the whey to do it. Industria de Laticinios 121, 6670.Google Scholar
Ünüvar, S (2018) Microbial foodborne diseases. In Holban, AM and Grumezescu, AM (eds.), Foodborne Diseases (First Edition). London, UK: Academic Press, pp 131.Google Scholar
Vissers, MMM and Driehuis, F (2008) On-farm hygienic milk production. In Tamime, AY (ed.), Milk Processing and Quality Management (First Edition). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, pp 122.Google Scholar
Walsh, C, Meade, J, Mcgill, K and Fanning, S (2012) The biodiversity of thermoduric bacteria isolated from whey. Journal of Food Safety 32, 255261.10.1111/j.1745-4565.2012.00375.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, X, Meng, J, Zhang, J, Zhou, T, Zhang, Y, Yang, B, Xi, M and Xia, X (2012) Characterization of Staphylococcus aureus isolated from powdered infant formula milk and infant rice cereal in China. International Journal of Food Microbiology 153, 142147.10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2011.10.030CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, X, Puri, VM and Demirci, A (2020) Equipment Cleaning, Sanitation, and Maintenance. In Demirci, A, Feng, H and Krishnamurthy, K (eds.), Food Safety Engineering. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 333353.Google Scholar
Yuan, D, Liu, G, Ren, D-Y, Zhang, D, Zhao, L, Kan, C-P, Yang, Y-Z, Ma, W, Li, Y and Zhang, L-B (2012) A survey on occurrence of thermophilic bacilli in commercial milk powders in China. Food Control 25, 752757.10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.12.020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zain, SNM, Flint, SH, Bennett, R and Tay, H-S (2016) Characterisation and biofilm screening of the predominant bacteria isolated from whey protein concentrate 80. Dairy Science & Technology 96, 285295.10.1007/s13594-015-0264-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, J, Wang, J, Jin, J, Li, X, Zhang, H, Shi, X and Zhao, C (2022) Prevalence, antibiotic resistance, and enterotoxin genes of Staphylococcus aureus isolated from milk and dairy products worldwide: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Food Research International 162, 111969.10.1016/j.foodres.2022.111969CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ziuzina, D, Los, A and Bourke, P (2018) Chapter 12 - Inactivation of Staphylococcus aureus in foods by thermal and nonthermal control strategies. In Fetsch, A (ed.), Staphylococcus Aureus. San Diego: Academic Press, 235255.10.1016/B978-0-12-809671-0.00012-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Figure 1. Main steps in whey powder production.

Figure 1

Table 1. Typical composition of sweet and acid whey (Papademas and Kotsaki, 2019)