Milk Whey- From a Problematic Byproduct to a Source of Valuable Products for Health and Industry: An Overview from Biotechnology

Abstract

Esmeraldas, Carchi, Ibarra, and Sucumbíos are Ecuadorian provinces that produce daily more than 407 m3 of milk. Almost a third of all this production is used to produce different types of cheeses, generating near to 122 m3 of whey in the provinces of Carchi and Imbabura. An important part of whey is used in animal feed, but unfortunately, a vast amount is poured into rivers, streams, etc.; polluting natural sources of water. More stringent environmental regulations joined to producers’ awareness, highlights the need to transform whey into less polluting effluents. If, as a result of this transformation, it is possible to obtain a range of new products with higher added value than the whey itself, the resources used in the conversion would be partially amortized. In the present review, some of the available technologies are explored from the biotechnology point of view to overcome this problem in the context of Zone 1 of Ecuador.

Full text

Pais Chanfrau, et al., Prensa Med Argent 2017, 103:4
DOI: 10.4172/lpma.1000257 La
Prensa
Medica Argentina
Research
Article
Milk Whey- From a Problematic
Byproduct to a Source of
Valuable Products for Health
and Industry: An Overview from
Biotechnology
Pais Chanfrau JM1*, Núñez Pérez J1, Lara Fiallos MV1, Rivera
Intriago LM2,3, Abril Porras VH4, Cuaran Guerrero MJ1 and LE
Trujillo Toledo4*
Abstract
Esmeraldas, Carchi, Ibarra and Sucumbíos are Ecuadorian
provinces that produce daily more than 407 m3 of milk. Almost
a third of all this production is used to produce different types of
cheeses, generating near to 122 m3 of whey in the provinces of
Carchi and Imbabura. An important part of whey is used in animal
feed, but unfortunately, a vast amount is poured into rivers, streams,
etc.; polluting natural sources of water. More stringent environmental
regulations joined to producers’ awareness, highlights the need to
transform whey into less polluting effluents. If, as a result of this
transformation, it is possible to obtain a range of new products with
higher added value than the whey itself, the resources used in the
conversion would be partially amortized. In the present review, some
of the available technologies are explored from the biotechnology point
of view to overcome this problem in the context of Zone 1 of Ecuador.
Keywords
Milk whey; Whey permeate; Single-cell protein; Lactic acid; Kefiran;
Galactooligosaccharides
Introduction
Carchi, Imbabura, Esmeraldas and Sucumbíos, are Ecuadorian
provinces in which agricultural and livestock activities constitute a
significant part of the economy and jobs source of these territories.
The majority of the population in these zones is dedicated to
the
production and commercialization of milk, being the Carchi province
the most outstanding productive region, reaching 4.8% of the
national milk production. A daily delivery of Ecuador is
around
79.8
m3 with a production
value
of about
US
$
3.5
million per year [1].
After whole milk, the most consumed dairy products in Ecuador
are fresh
cheeses like creole, mozzarella,
kneading and curds [2]. In eight
years
(2006-2014)
the per capita consumption of
cheese
in Ecuador was
doubled, from
0.75 kg
per person per year in
2006
to
1.57 kg
in
2014
[2].
Sales
of the
cheese
industry increased 3.4 times between
2006
and 2016,
from
US$ 71.4
million to
US$ 243.1
million [2].
*Corresponding authors: Luis E Trujillo Toledo, Industrial Biotechnology and Bio
products Research Group, CENCINAT, Universidad de las Fuerzas Armadas
ESPE,
Ave. Rumiñahui s/n. Quito, Pichincha, Ecuador, E-mail: letrujillo3@espe.edu.ec, and
José M. Pais Chanfrau, GILAC Group, FICAYA, Universidad Técnica del Norte UTN,
Ave. 17 de julio, 5-21, y Gral. José Ma. Córdova, CP 100105, Ibarra, Imbabura,
Ecuador, E-mail: jmpais@utn.edu.ec.
Received: August 01, 2017 Accepted: August 12, 2017 Published: August 17,
2017
About one-third of dairy production in the region is devoted
to
the cheese manufacture [2]. As a result of the production of different
types of cheeses, milk whey (sweet (SW) or acid (AW) whey) is
obtained. For every 100 kg of milk used to produce cheeses, 9.3
±
0.7 kg of fresh cheese [3] and around 90.7 kg of SW/AW [4,5] are
obtained. The SW/AW retains a large part of the nutrients
contained
in the milk so; biotechnology has proposed some possible ways
to
use this by-product [4,6-9] useful as animal food [10-12] and
in
biological
treatment with sludge to produce organic
fertilizers
for soil
improvement [13,14].
In this sense, due to its high lactose levels, the SW/AW is a
significant pollutant with
values
of 30-50 kg m-3 of
biological
oxygen
demand (BOD5) [15], and its dumping to lakes, rivers, and soils
should be avoided.
One of the most attractive uses of SW/AW is the development
of products based on whey proteins [6,16-19], providing a
protein
concentrate of
excellent
quality for human and animal
consumption
[16]. However, as
a result
of
the
whey
protein isolation
process,
a whey
permeates (PW) of milk with a high lactose content is obtained,
and
therefore with high pollutant load values [20,21]. Various uses have
been proposed for PW, ranging from the production of unicellular
microbial protein for animal feed [10,12], the production of organic
acids [22,23], alcohols [24,25], also the production of probiotics [9]
and different prebiotic substances [26-28].
The objective of this review is to explore various technical
solutions from the
biotechnology
point of
view
that contributes to
the
use and valorization of SW/AW or PW encouraging the
continued
growth of the Dairy Industry in Ecuador.
Milk
whey
- A byproduct of cheese production, the main
constraint to the growth of the dairy sector
According to Association of Livestock of the Sierra and East of
Ecuador
(AGSO),
in 2017 an
average
of 5.4 million liters of milk was
registered daily at the national
level
[29]. In the
“Sierra”
region, milk
production reaches 77% of the total, whereas Imbabura and Carchi
produce
7.4%
of the national milk production, which represents
more
than 407 m3 of whole milk per day. From those, near of 135.7 m3 is
destined to
cheese
production, and near of 122 m3 of milk whey daily
is generated in Carchi and Imbabura provinces.
Milk whey (SW/AW) represents 85-95% of the volume of milk
and retains 55% of all the nutrients contained in milk [30,31]. SW/
AW represents the main by-product and the highest
contaminant
in dairy production [15,32,33], reaching values of chemical oxygen
demand (COD) and biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) of 60-80
and 30-50 kg m-3,
respectively
[34,35].
Globally,
around
180-190
million metric tons (TM) of whey were
produced in 2013 [36,37]. For this, 40% of this production is used in
direct feed, as fertilizer, or discarded, while the rest is industrially
transformed
basically
in the production of whey powder, lactose
and
whey protein concentrates as shown in Figure 1.
As Kosikowski rightly points out, “dispose of” is not the same
thing that to
“use”
the milk
whey
[5].
Even
today,
significant
amounts
International Publisher of Science,
Technology and Medicine
All articles published in La Prensa Medica Argentina are the property of OMICS Publishing Group, and is protected by
copyright laws. Copyright © 2017, OMICS Group, All Rights Reserved.

Citation: Pais Chanfrau JM, Núñez Pérez J, Lara Fiallos MV, Rivera Intriago LM, Abril Porras VH, Cuaran Guerrero MJ, Trujillo Toledo LE (2017) Milk
Whey- From a Problematic Byproduct to a Source of Valuable Products. Prensa Med Argent 2017, 103:4
for Health and Industry: An Overview from Biotechnology. Prensa Med Argent 103:4
doi: 10.4172/lpma.1000257
Volume 103 • Issue 4 • 1000257
•
Pa ge 2 of 11
•
Food,
&
of SW/AW are discharged into rivers and streams or are sprayed
directly into cultivated
fields
after dilution. The latter, in spite of
the
apparent advantages that could be observed, after long periods of
shedding, the high salt content in the SW/AW tends to salinize
the
soils,
thus diminishing agricultural yields.
Also,
increasing
awareness
of these adverse
effects
is becoming
increasingly prevalent, and states’ environmental laws
and
regulations tend to prohibit such practices. As a consequence,
small and medium-sized cheese producers could find it difficult
to compete in the market with large companies, given the need
to
have adequate waste treatment plants to treat their whey effluent.
This environmental and regulatory “pressure” would become a
constraint to the continued growth of small and medium-sized
cheese
producers.
Different SW/AW uses have been published anywhere [4,7,8,38-
41]. As stated above, SW is very popular for animal feeding due
to
the important amounts of lactose (4.5-5% (m/v), proteins (0.6-0.8%
(m/v)), 0.5% (m/v)) and mineral salts (8-10% on dry basis) [28].
However, as shown in Figure 2, SW/AW has other important uses
because it constitutes an important source of proteins isolation [6,16-
18,42] one of the most promising SW/AW use nowadays.
Several
properties such as the high quality of these proteins and
their
beneficial
effects
on human and animal health
[11,35,36]
joined to
the
simplicity
of the process to get them (Figure 3), reinforce the
potential
of this
SW/AW application.
Membrane
technology
is the most used in SW/AW
concentration
to produce
whey
protein concentrates
[7,16,20,21,40,43,44].
A typical
process is based on
successive
ultrafiltration steps (UF) and reverses
Global Production of Whey: 180 million
TM
(2013)
Industrial
Uses
59%
Industrial
Uses
WPC & WPC
ingredie nts
35%
Whey Powder
& Lactose
58%
Other
Products
7%
Figure 1: Global production of whey (2013) and its uses.
Figure 2: Some uses that may be done to milk whey [15].

Citation: Pais Chanfrau JM, Núñez Pérez J, Lara Fiallos MV, Rivera Intriago LM, Abril Porras VH, Cuaran Guerrero MJ, Trujillo Toledo LE (2017) Milk
Whey- From a Problematic Byproduct to a Source of Valuable Products. Prensa Med Argent 2017, 103:4
for Health and Industry: An Overview from Biotechnology. Prensa Med Argent 103:4
doi: 10.4172/lpma.1000257
Volume 103 • Issue 4 • 1000257
•
Pa ge 3 of 11
•
Figure 3: The typical membrane-based process to obtain whey protein concentrates or whey powder.
osmosis (RO), followed by concentration by evaporation and a final
spray-drier step.
However, using this technology, a deproteinized milk whey
permeate lactose-rich
is
obtained from the ultrafiltration
effluent.
This
lactose –rich byproduct
(3.9-4.8%
(m/v)) also contains mineral salts,
ash
(0.3-0.8%
(m/v)) and protein traces
(0.1-0.3%
(m/v)) (39), which
gives BOD5 >30
kg m-3 [45] and therefore constitutes a high
pollutant
which must be treated or used as raw material for other processes.
The main cause of its high BOD5 value is lactose, a disaccharide
that
has
several
uses in the chemical, food and pharmaceutical
industries
[46-48].
Microbial-based biotechnological processes
to biotransform
permeate
of
whey
in
valuable
products
Despite that lactose excess present in SW/AW is considered as
waste, an interesting group of products can be obtained by lactose
biotransformation using certain lactose-degrading bacteria
and
yeast, to produce a broad range of bio products with higher income
potentialities than that offered by the original whey [8,15,34,49-52].
By this way, not only can diminish the pollution load of the whey
or its permeate but also can increase the business portfolio of dairy
companies.
One of them is lactic acid (C3H6O3,
CAS
L (+): 79-33-4) that has
several applications in the food and cosmetic industry [53-56]. L(+)
- lactic acid can be obtained from the biotransformation of lactose by
Lactobacillus
spp. strains, such
as Lactobacillus casei
[49,53,55,57-60].
This process can be performed by direct microbial transformation
in
submerged cultures [61-63], or by immobilizing the microbial cells
and using a continuous culture in a packing-bed bioreactor with
immobilized
cells [22,55,64,65],
as shown in Figure 4.
The conventional process consists
briefly
of a fermentation stage
where the PW is supplemented with salts and vitamins to achieve
the growth of the selected lactic-acid bacteria (LAB) strain (e.g.,
Lactobacillus casei), keeping the pH close to its optimal growth
conditions [56,63]. Subsequently, the biomass obtained and
the
calcium lactate is separated and washed by
differential
centrifugation.
Calcium lactate is then converted to lactic acid by the addition of
sulfuric acid and further separated from the sparingly
soluble
calcium
sulphate.
Finally,
lactic acid is concentrated by evaporation to
about
50% (v/v) (Figure 4A). Another alternative procedure consists in
in
calcium alginate
LAB
cells immobilizing in a continuous enzymatic
bioreactor to convert the lactate present in PW to lactic acid
[22,55,64,66]
(Figure 4B).
Also, the lyophilized biomass of L.
casei,
a recognized
probiotic
[67], whose intake gives benefits to human health [67-69], could be
obtained by a similar process.
Lactose present in SW/AW, PW or PWC could also be used
to
obtain microbial single-cell protein (SCP), using, for example,
the
recognized as safe (GRAS status) yeast Kluyveromyces
marxianus
[10,11]. This yeast
can metabolize
lactose
and reach high
cell
densities
and also is capable of producing significant
levels
of ethanol [30,70-
72],
widely
used throughout the
industry.
A proposed process flow scheme for the production of single-
cell protein (SCP) and ethanol from SW/AW, PW or PWC and K.
marxianus is shown in Figure 5. Briefly, the process consists of a
continuous or semi-continuous fermentation step where the lactose
consuming yeast, for example, K. marxianus, growth and secretes
ethanol to medium. Subsequently, after thermal inactivation of
the
microorganism in the culture, the biomass is separated and washed
from the supernatant. Finally, the biomass is spray dried, while
the
ethyl alcohol (technical grade) obtained from the broth
supernatant
can be recovered by atmospheric distillation [24,72-76].
Other organic acids, such as propionic acid [23,77,78], butyric
acid [79] and citric acid [80]
have also
been produced
by
the microbial
biotransformation of whey.
Similarly,
other
alcohols
such
as
butanol
have
been bio synthesized
from certain microbial strains and whey [25,81,82].
Other valuable chemicals derived from whey can be obtained by
microbial fermentation such as hydrogen [83-86],
polyhydroxyalkanoates [87-89], lipids [90-92], ribonucleotides
[93,94], exopolysaccharides
[95-97], etc.

Citation: Pais Chanfrau JM, Núñez Pérez J, Lara Fiallos MV, Rivera Intriago LM, Abril Porras VH, Cuaran Guerrero MJ, Trujillo Toledo LE (2017) Milk
Whey- From a Problematic Byproduct to a Source of Valuable Products. Prensa Med Argent 2017, 103:4
for Health and Industry: An Overview from Biotechnology. Prensa Med Argent 103:4
doi: 10.4172/lpma.1000257
Volume 103 • Issue 4 • 1000257
•
Pa ge 4 of 11
•
A
B
Figure 4: Lactic acid production scheme from SW/AW, PW, or PWC by (A) submerged microbial fermentation; (B) immobilized microbial-cells.
Finally,
a consortium made up by lactic acid bacteria
(LAB)
and
yeasts, which cohabit within a polymer called kefiran, and which is
called a kefir granule, has been used since ancient times to
produce
a
fermented milk called kefir of high nutritional values [98,99]
beneficial
for human health.
Kefir granules could be used to biotransform the SW/AW,
PW
or PWC, rich in lactose, to produce kefiran, an edible biopolymer,
consisting of units of glucose and galactose in approximately equal
proportions [100,101]. Recent studies [102-104] have
demonstrated
several health-beneficial properties of this biopolymer that make
it
attractive in drug formulation
[104-107]
and food preservation [108].
Due to these interesting properties, this edible and biodegradable
biopolymer has attracted the researcher’s attention and so,
the
design
of different production process [109]. A proposed process scheme
for kefiran production from SW/AW, PW or PWC and kefir granules
is shown in Figure 6. Briefly, the process consists in
the
biotransformation of the lactose present in the PW or PWC, by
the
existing
consortium
LAB
in the
kefir
granule.
After 48
h
fermentation,
the culture is homogenized and pasteurized to inactivate
the

Citation: Pais Chanfrau JM, Núñez Pérez J, Lara Fiallos MV, Rivera Intriago LM, Abril Porras VH, Cuaran Guerrero MJ, Trujillo Toledo LE (2017) Milk
Whey- From a Problematic Byproduct to a Source of Valuable Products. Prensa Med Argent 2017, 103:4
for Health and Industry: An Overview from Biotechnology. Prensa Med Argent 103:4
doi: 10.4172/lpma.1000257
Volume 103 • Issue 4 • 1000257
•
Pa ge 5 of 11
•
Figure 5: Process flow scheme for the SCP and ethanol production from SW/AW, PW, or PWC.
hydrolytic
enzymes,
the
cell
debris is subsequently separated, and
the
soluble
kefiran is precipitated with ethanol, the mixture is centrifuged
and the precipitate separated, which is subjected to several washes
with hot water until the lactose residues are removed. Finally,
the
kefiran can be dried at
60°C
for 24 h [105].
Enzyme-based
biotechnological processes to biotransform
permeate
of
whey
in
valuable
products
Some hydrolytic enzymes, such β-galactosidase (EC 3.2.1.23),
could be used to hydrolyze or polymerize lactose, present in SW/
AW, PW or PWC. At concentrations of lactose
below 30%
(m/v),
the
hydrolysis of lactose in glucose and galactose predominates [106];
while at higher concentrations the trans-galactosylation reaction
and
the formation of galacto-oligosaccharides (GOS) could be favored
[107,110-112].
Some authors highlight the beneficial effects of GOS on
human
health [108,109] since they are considered as prebiotic substances
[113,114].
In Figures
7A
and
7B,
the proposed production schemes for
both,
the hydrolysis of lactose and the formation of GOS,
respectively,
are
shown. Both
processes
can be performed
by
immobilizing the enzyme
β-galactosidase,
which would
allow
reusing the enzyme and lowering
production costs.
In the case of lactose hydrolysis (Figure 7A), it is favored
at
concentrations below 30% (w/v) of lactose
[26,106,107,113,114].
In
this case, the enzymatic hydrolysis reaction is favored yielding
the
expected products:
Lac ⇋ Glu + Gal
Where Lac, Glu y Gal represent Lactose (Glu-Gal), glucose
and
galactose,
respectively.
A nano-filtration system can also be coupled to the collector
tank to allow the lactose to separate from glucose and galactose.
Lactose
can be reused,
while
the
glucose
and
galactose
mixture can be
concentrated to marketable
levels
by evaporation.
If
lactose
concentration
is
>30-35%
(m/v),
the
trans-galactosylation
of lactose would be favored (Figure
7B),
and galactooligosaccharides
of different polymerization degrees (PD) could be obtained (PD
≥
2), depending on the number of different species of GOS and
the
conditions of the enzymatic reaction. For example, if three
GOS
with
different DPs is produced, we would have product
yields
as follow:
3(n-1)∙Lac ⇌ Glu-(Gal)n + Glu-(Gal)n-1 + Glu-(Gal)n-2 + 3(n-2)∙Glu
where Glu-(Gal)n, Glu-(Gal)n-1, Glu-(Gal)n-2 represent the
GOS
and n represents the DP of GOS.
Notes for economic feasibility analysis
The
valorization
of
whey
is
a
strategic
decision for dairy companies
because
it eliminates the
“bottleneck”
that the high
volumes
generated
SW/AW impose on the continuous growth of dairy
production.
However, it is
always
desirable that the investment necessary for
the
implementation of some of the technologies described above, can be
amortized and
yields
gains in reasonable terms.
For the complete economic analysis, each valuation technology,
in particular, the predictions of product and sector growth,
market
demand and the financial
availability
of dairy companies should be
taken into account [115,116].
From 100 kg of whole fresh milk and an average yield of 9.30
± 0.7 kg in the production of the different kinds of cheeses and
the
generation of about 90.70 kg of sweet whey [3]. Table 1 compares
some of the reported yields and reference prices for a group of
available
whey technologies.
The products prices as described below vary from those that are
similar to that which would be obtained from the commercialization of
the fresh milk itself. It means 8.3 kg fluid milk kg whole milk powder-1,
therefore: 100 TM fluid milk equivalents to 12 TM of approximately
whole milk powder and whose price is US $ 3 200 per TM, to those that
exceed two digits to that of milk (Figure 8).
These values allow classifying whey recovery technologies, in
those that provide low, medium and high income (Figure 8).

Citation: Pais Chanfrau JM, Núñez Pérez J, Lara Fiallos MV, Rivera Intriago LM, Abril Porras VH, Cuaran Guerrero MJ, Trujillo Toledo LE (2017) Milk
Whey- From a Problematic Byproduct to a Source of Valuable Products. Prensa Med Argent 2017, 103:4
for Health and Industry: An Overview from Biotechnology. Prensa Med Argent 103:4
doi: 10.4172/lpma.1000257
Volume 103 • Issue 4 • 1000257
•
Pa ge 6 of 11
•
Figure 6: Process flow scheme for the production of kefiran from kefir grain and SW/AW, PW, or PWC.
A
B
Figure 7: Process flow scheme for the enzymatic transformation of SW/AW, PW, or PWC in (A) Hydrolysis of lactose to glucose and
galactose; (B) Trans-galactosylation of lactose to galactooligosaccharides of different degree of polymerization.

Citation: Pais Chanfrau JM, Núñez Pérez J, Lara Fiallos MV, Rivera Intriago LM, Abril Porras VH, Cuaran Guerrero MJ, Trujillo Toledo LE (2017) Milk
Whey- From a Problematic Byproduct to a Source of Valuable Products. Prensa Med Argent 2017, 103:4
for Health and Industry: An Overview from Biotechnology. Prensa Med Argent 103:4
doi: 10.4172/lpma.1000257
Volume 103 • Issue 4 • 1000257
•
Pa ge 7 of 11
•
Also, during the valorization process of whey, it is possible to
reduce significantly the contaminant load of the effluents, which is one
of the main reasons for the implementation of these technologies.
From effluents requiring a primary, secondary and tertiary treatments
(for the treatment of SW/AW and PW), to less polluting effluents,
presumably requiring only primary treatment, which would reduce the
costs of treatment in the dairy companies.
Conclusion Remarks
Zone 1 of Ecuador and specifically the provinces of Carchi and
Imbabura are purely livestock and cheese producers. An important
part of the economically active population of these provinces is
dedicated to the production and commercialization of cheeses,
prevailing small and medium producers.
With the increment of environmental regulations together with the
gradually ecological conscience of producers, it becomes more
difficult to pour, dairy surplus and significant amounts of whey in
rivers, lakes and streams.
Therefore, the growth of the dairy and cheese sector of small and
medium producers is limited by the high volumes of milk whey
this
would bring, due to the high COD and
BOD values of
this
by-product.
An alternative is to seek to reduce the impact of effluents by
searching for technologies that use whey as the starting raw material,
as discussed below in this review.
However, to implement these technologies, it is essential
to
undertake an investment process and to have certain financial
resources that are hardly available in small and medium milk
and
cheese producers, even if they may eventually be associated
in
cooperatives for these purposes.
Table 1: It is comparative data of some of the whey valorization technologies available. From 100 TM of whole fresh milk.
Process
Not treat.
WPC
SCP
WP
Glu & Gal
Lactic Ac.
GOS
KEF
Cheeses, TM
9.30 ± 0.7 a
Valorized Product
-
WPC-34
(34% Prot.)
Single-cell
protein
Whey dried
powder
Glucose &
Galactose
Lactic Acid
Galacto-
oligosaccharides
Kefirán
Qty.2,3, TM
-
2.06
2.18 b
5.80
81.63
79.82 c
81.63
0.31 d
Ref. Price
-
US$1974
/TM e
US$1950
/TM f
US$1100
/TM g
US$600-790
/TM h
US$1000
/TM
US$20-200
/kg
US$30
/g
Residual
SW/AW
PW
waste water
waste water
waste water
waste water
waste water
waste water
Qty., TM
90.70
88.64
>88.43
84.90
9.07
>10.88
9.07
>90.38
Lac, %(m/v)
4.8
4.7
0.5
0.1
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.2
COD, kg/m3 i
70
55
6.0
1.2
4.6
2.3
2.3
2.3
a Average value [3] . A price is assumed for the cheese curd US$3 764/TM (taken from: http://www.clal.it/en/?section=ricotta, July 24th 2017)
b Assuming a yield Yxs=0.52 TM DB TM lactose-1 [117], so: 0.52*(90.70/1.04)*(48/1000)=2.18 TM and a reduction of 80-90% of COD
c Assuming a 36 h process where 95.6% of the lactose present in the serum (4%) was consumed and a lactic acid concentration of 33.73 g L-1 [63]. So: YPX=33.73/(0.956*40)=0.88 TM Lactic Acid TM
lactose-1 and density. @ 80% = 1.2 TM m-3; Vol. syrup @ (80% (m/v)) = 0.88*90.70/0.8 = 99.77m3 syrup.
d Unpublished Result.
e Taken from: http://www.clal.it/en/?section=sieroproteine (July 7th 2017)
f Taken from: https://wholesaler.alibaba.com/product-detail/Manufacture-wholesale-price-instant-dry-yeast_60614513305.html?spm=a2700.7782932.1998701000.11.0W8xnR (July 14th 2017)
g Taken from: http://www.clal.it/en/?section=whey (July 7th 2017)
h Taken from: https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Fructose-Glucose-Maltose-rice-syrup-Factory_60669804468.html?spm=a2700.7724838.2017115.231.87bIGj&s=p (17/7/2017)
i Values assumed in proportion to the lactose concentration in the whey permeate (PW) of milk.
Figure 8: It is a comparison of some of the existing technologies for the valorization of whey. The dashed line represents the price of
whole milk powder obtained from processing 100 TM of whole fresh milk.
1
10
100
1000
10000
Sales ( x 103US$/100 TM milk)
low income
medium income
high income

Citation: Pais Chanfrau JM, Núñez Pérez J, Lara Fiallos MV, Rivera Intriago LM, Abril Porras VH, Cuaran Guerrero MJ, Trujillo Toledo LE (2017) Milk
Whey- From a Problematic Byproduct to a Source of Valuable Products. Prensa Med Argent 2017, 103:4
for Health and Industry: An Overview from Biotechnology. Prensa Med Argent 103:4
doi: 10.4172/lpma.1000257
Volume 103 • Issue 4 • 1000257
•
Pa ge 8 of 11
•
Figure 9: Interrelations that will enable the continued growth of Dairy production to small and medium-sized producers by eliminating
the limitations that the high volumes of milk whey may exercise on growth in the production of milk and cheeses.
A possible solution is to find out external funds from the private
or state sector. Also, to establish public-private partnerships
that
allow access to financial resources and encourage
entrepreneurship,
and so that, it can stimulate and foster increases in future of milk
production among small and medium producers in Zone 1 and all
over Ecuador.
The Academy including Universities, Technical Institutes and
Research
Centers, on the other hand, could contribute to the
required
studies, the developments and the most appropriate technologies, as
well
as in the formation of the entrepreneurs that can undertake these
projects.
All
these
efforts,
as a
whole,
could be combined to guarantee
the continuous growth of milk production in Zone 1 of Ecuador
in
the forthcoming
years,
in the
way
shown in Figure 9.
Also,
with the new
facilities,
new job sources would be generated,
current imports would be replaced, and the productive matrix of
Ecuador would be changing and expandi
ng.
References
1. Requelme N, Bonifaz N (2012) Characterization of dairy production systems
in Ecuador. Univ Polytechnic Sales Ecuador Rev La 15: 55-68.
2. Orozco M (2015) A third of dairy production is devoted to cheese. Leaders 1.
3. Dalla Costa CA (2015) Theoretical and real questionable performance of the
milk of the villa maría Basin, Córdoba. Catholic University of Cordoba,
Argentina
4. Parra R a (2009) Whey: importance in the food industry. Rev Fac Nac
Agropecu Medellín 62:4967-4982.
5. Kosikowski FV (1979) Whey Utilization and Whey Products. J Dairy Sci
62:1149-1160.
6. Smithers GW, Ballard JF, Copeland AD, de Silva KJ, Dionysius DA, et al.
(1996) New Opportunities from the Isolation and Utilization of Whey Proteins.
J Dairy Sci 79: 1454-1469.
7. Fuquay JW, Jelen P (2011) Whey processing | Utilization and Products.
Encycl Dairy Sci 731-737.
8. Ryan MP, Walsh G (2016) The biotechnological potential of whey. Rev
Environ Sci Biotechnol 15: 479-498.
9. Yadav JS, Yan S, Pilli S, Kumar L, Tyagi RD, et al. (2015) Cheese whey: A
potential resource to transform into bioprotein, functional/nutritional proteins
and bioactive peptides. Biotechnol Adv 33: 756-774.
10. Somaye F, Marzieh M, Lale N (2005) Single Cell Protein (SCP) production
from UF cheese whey by Kluyveromyces marxianus. 18th Natl Congr Food
Technol 8-13.
11. Babu M (2014) Production of single cell protein using Klyuveromyces
marxianus isolated form paneer whey. Int J Biomed Adv Res 5: 79-80.
12. Yadav JSS, Yan S, Ajila CM, Bezawada J, Tyagi RD, et al. (2016) Food-grade
single-cell protein production, characterization and ultrafiltration recovery of
residual fermented whey proteins from whey. Food Bioprod Process 99: 156-
165.
13. Pesta G, Pittroff MR, Russ W (2007) Utilization of whey. Util. By-Products
Treat. Waste Food Indb 193-207
14. Grosu L, Fernandez B, Grigoraş CG, Patriciu OI, Grig ICA, et al. (2012)
Valorization of whey from dairy industry for agricultural use as fertilizer: Effects
on plant germination and growth. Environ Eng Manag J 11: 2203-
2210.
15. Marwaha SS, Kennedy JF (1988) Whey-pollution problem and potential
utilization. Int J Food Sci Technol 23: 323-336.
16. Jayaprakasha HM, Brueckner H (1999) Whey Protein Concentrate: A
Potential Functional Ingredient for Food Industry. J Food Sci Technol 36:
189-204.
17. Jelen P (2009) Dried Whey, Whey Proteins, Lactose and Lactose Derivative
Products, Dairy Powders and Concentrated Products Society of Dairy
Technology. John Wiley & Sons, USA.
18. Boland M (2011) Whey proteins. In: Phillips GO, Williams PA, Handbook of
Food Proteins. Elsevier, USA.
19. Jeewanthi RKC, Lee NK, Paik HD (2015) Improved Functional Characteristics
of Whey Protein Hydrolysates in Food Industry. Korean J Food Sci Anim
Resour 35: 350-359.
20. Hanemaaijer JH (1985) Microfiltration in whey processing. Desalination 53:
143-155.
21. Atra R, Vatai G, Molnar BE, Balint A (2005) Investigation of ultra- And
nanofiltration for utilization of whey protein and lactose. J Food Eng 67: 325-
332.

Citation: Pais Chanfrau JM, Núñez Pérez J, Lara Fiallos MV, Rivera Intriago LM, Abril Porras VH, Cuaran Guerrero MJ, Trujillo Toledo LE (2017) Milk
Whey- From a Problematic Byproduct to a Source of Valuable Products. Prensa Med Argent 2017, 103:4
for Health and Industry: An Overview from Biotechnology. Prensa Med Argent 103:4
doi: 10.4172/lpma.1000257
Volume 103 • Issue 4 • 1000257
•
Pa ge 9 of 11
•
22. Norton S, Lacroix C, Vuillemard JC (1994) Kinetic study of continuous whey
permeate fermentation by immobilized Lactobacillus helveticus for lactic acid
production. Enzyme Microb Technol 16: 457-466.
23. Colomban A, Roger L, Boyaval P (1993) Production of propionic acid from
whey permeate by sequential fermentation, ultrafiltration, and cell recycling.
Biotechnol Bioeng 42: 1091-1098.
24. Gabardo S, Rech R, Rosa CA, Ayub MAZ (2014) Dynamics of ethanol
production from whey and whey permeate by immobilized strains of
Kluyveromyces marxianus in batch and continuous bioreactors. Renew
Energy 69: 89-96.
25. Qureshi N, Friedl A, Maddox IS (2014) Butanol production from concentrated
lactose/whey permeate: Use of pervaporation membrane to recover and
concentrate product. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 98: 9859-9867.
26. Golowczyc M, Vera C, Santos M, Guerrero C, Carasi P et al. (2013) Use of whey
permeate containing in situ synthesized galacto-oligosaccharides for the growth
and preservation of Lactobacillus plantarum. J Dairy Res 80: 374-381.
27. Padilla B, Frau F, Ruiz-Matute
AI,
Montilla A, Belloch C et al. (2015) Production
of lactulose oligosaccharides by isomerization of transgalactosylated cheese
whey permeate obtained by β-galactosidases from dairy Kluyveromyces. J
Dairy Res 82: 356-364.
28. Geiger B, Nguyen HM, Wenig S, Nguyen HA, Lorenz C et al. (2016) From
by-product to valuable components: Efficient enzymatic conversion of lactose
in whey using beta-galactosidase from Streptococcus thermophilus. Biochem
Eng J 116: 45-53.
29. Peralta A (2017) Efficiency in milk production. VIII Forum of Sect. Milk.
Ecuadorian. Strategies for Better. The Consum. Dairy in the population.,
Quito: Center of the Milk Industry (CIL) 20.
30. Guimarães PMR, Teixeira JA, Domingues L (2010) Fermentation of lactose
to bio-ethanol by yeasts as part of integrated solutions for the valorization of
cheese whey. Biotechnol Adv 28: 375-384.
31. Kosikowski F V ( 1979) Whey Utilization and Whey Products. J Dairy Sci
62:1149-1160.
32. Peters RH (2005) Economic aspects of cheese making as influenced by whey
processing options. Int. Dairy J 15: 537-545.
33. Koutinas AA, Papapostolou H, Dimitrellou D, Kopsahelis N, Katechaki E, et al.
(2009) Whey valorization: A complete and novel technology development for dairy
industry starter culture production. Bioresour Technol 100: 3734-3739.
34. Gonzalez Siso MI (1996) The biotechnological utilization of cheese whey: A
review. Bioresour Technol 57: 1–11.
35. Kotoupas A, Rigas F, Chalaris M ( 2007) Computer-aided process design,
economic evaluation and environmental impact assessment for treatment of
cheese whey wastewater. Desalination 213: 238-252.
36. Ramos OL, Pereira RN, Rodrigues RM, Teixeira J, Malcata FX, et al. (2016)
Whey and Whey Powders: Production and Uses. Encycl Food Heal 5: 498-
505.
37. Mollea C, Marmo L, Bosco F. ( 201 3) Valorization of Cheese Whey, a By-
Product from the Dairy Industry. Food Ind 549–88.
38. Bednarski W (1988) Possibilities for whey utilization. Przem Ferment I
Owocowo-Warzywny 32:14-17.
39. Kosaric N, Asher Y (1982) Cheese whey and its utilization. Conserv Recycl
5: 23–32.
40. Ramchandran L, Vasiljevic T (2012) Whey Processing. Membr Process Dairy
Beverage Appl 193-207.
41. Ramos OL, Pereira RN, Rodrigues RM, Teixeira J A, Malcata FX et al (2016)
Whey and Whey Powders: Production and Uses. Encycl Food Heal 5: 498-
505.
42. Smithers GW (2008) Whey and whey proteins-From “gutter-to-gold”. Int
Dairy J 18:695-704.
43. Jelen P (2011) Whey processing: Utilization and Products. Elsevier: 731-737.
44. Cuartas-Uribe B, Vincent-Vela MC, Álvarez-Blanco S, Alcaina-Miranda MI,
Soriano-Costa E (2007) Nanofiltration of sweet whey and prediction of lactose
retention as a function of permeate flux using the Kedem-Spiegler and Donnan
Steric Partioning models. Sep Purif Technol 56: 38-46.
45. Mawson AJ (1994) Bioconversions for whey utilization and waste abatement.
Bioresour Technol 47: 195-203.
46. Booij CJ (1985) Use of lactose in the pharmaceutical and chemical industry. J
Soc Dairy Technol 38: 105-109.
47. Zadow JG. Lactose: Properties and Uses. J Dairy Sci (1984);67: 2654-2679.
48. Paterson AHJ (2009) Production and uses of lactose. Adv. Dairy Chem 3: 105-
120.
49. Panesar PS, Kennedy JF, Gandhi DN, Bunko K (2007) Bioutilisation of whey
for lactic acid production. Food Chem 105: 1-14.
50. Panesar PS, Kennedy JF ( 2012) Biotechnological approaches for the value
addition of whey. Crit Rev Biotechnol 32: 327-348.
51. Spălățelu (Vicol) C (2012) Biotechnological valorization of whey. Innov Rom
Food Biotechnol 10: 1-8.
52. Pescuma M, de Valdez GF, Mozzi F (2015) Whey-derived valuable products
obtained by microbial fermentation. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 99: 6183-6196
53. Litchfield JH (2009) Lactic Acid, Microbially Produced . Encycl. Microbiol 362-372.
54. Wasewar KL (2005) Separation of Lactic Acid : Recent Advances. Chem
Biochem Eng Q 19: 159-172.
55. Roukas T, Kotzekidou P (1991) Production of lactic acid from deproteinized
whey by coimmobilized Lactobacillus casei and Lactococcus lactis cells.
Enzyme Microb Technol; 13:33-38.
56. Roukas T, Kotzekidou P ( 1998) Lactic acid production from deproteinized
whey by mixed cultures of free and coimmobilized Lactobacillus casei and
Lactococcus lactis cells using fedbatch culture. Enzyme Microb Technol 22:
199-204.
57. Büyükkileci AO, Harsa S (2004) Batch production of L(+) lactic acid from whey
by Lactobacillus casei (NRRL B-441). J Chem Technol Biotechnol 79: 1036-
1040.
58. Ding S, Tan T (2006) L-lactic acid production by Lactobacillus casei fermentation
using different fed-batch feeding strategies. Process Biochem 41: 1451-1454
59. Narayanan N (2004) L (+) lactic acid fermentation and its product polymerization.
Electron J Biotechnol 7: 167-79.
60. Wee Y, Kim J, Ryu H (2006) Biotechnological Production of Lactic Acid and Its
Recent Applications. Food Technol Biotechnol 44: 163-72.
61. Alvarez MM, Aguirre-Ezkauriatza EJ, Ramírez-Medrano A, Rodríguez-
Sánchez Á, et al. (2010) Kinetic analysis and mathematical modeling of growth
and lactic acid production of Lactobacillus casei var. rhamnosus in milk whey.
J Dairy Sci 93: 5552-5560.
62. Stieber RW, Gerhardt P (1979) Continuous Process for Ammonium-Lactate
Fermentation of Deproteinized Whey. J Dairy Sci 62: 1558-1566.
63. Panesar PS, Kennedy JF, Knill CJ, Kosseva M. Production of L(+) (2010)
Lactic Acid using Lactobacillus casei from Whey. Brazilian Arch Biol Technol
53: 219-226.
64. Kosseva MR (2013) Use of immobilized biocatalyst for valorization of whey
lactose. Food Ind. Wastes 137–156.
65. Bruno-Bárcena JM, Ragout a L, Córdoba PR, Siñeriz F (1999)
Continuous production of L(+)-lactic acid by Lactobacillus casei in two-stage
systems. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 51: 316–324.
66. Kosseva MR, Panesar PS, Kaur G, Kennedy JF (2009) Use of immobilized
biocatalysts in the processing of cheese whey. Int J Biol Macromol 45: 437–
447.
67. Aguirre-Ezkauriatza EJ, Aguilar-Yáñez JM, Ramírez-Medrano A, Alvarez
MM (2010) Production of probiotic biomass (Lactobacillus casei) in goat milk
whey: Comparison of batch, continuous and fed-batch cultures. Bioresour
Technol 101: 2837-2844.
68. Fooks LJ, Fuller R, Gibson GR (1999) Prebiotics, probiotics and human gut
microbiology. Int Dairy J 9: 53-61.
69. Chen LA, Sears CL (2014) Prebiotics, Probiotics, and Synbiotics. Mand.
Douglas, Bennett’s Princ. Pract. Infect. Dis p.19–25.

Citation: Pais Chanfrau JM, Núñez Pérez J, Lara Fiallos MV, Rivera Intriago LM, Abril Porras VH, Cuaran Guerrero MJ, Trujillo Toledo LE (2017) Milk
Whey- From a Problematic Byproduct to a Source of Valuable Products. Prensa Med Argent 2017, 103:4
for Health and Industry: An Overview from Biotechnology. Prensa Med Argent 103:4
doi: 10.4172/lpma.1000257
Volume 103 • Issue 4 • 1000257
•
Pa ge 10 of 11
•
70. Koushki M, Jafari M, Azizi M (2012) Comparison of ethanol production from
cheese whey permeate by two yeast strains. J Food Sci Technol 49: 614–619.
71. Sansonetti S, Curcio S, Calabrò V, Iorio G (2009) Bio-ethanol production by
fermentation of ricotta cheese whey as an effective alternative non-vegetable
source. Biomass and Bioenergy 33: 1687–1692.
72. Jedrzejewska M, Kozak K (2011) Ethanol production from whey permeate
in a continuous anaerobic bioreactor by Kluyveromyces marxianus. Environ
Technol 32: 37–42.
73. Lane MM, Morrissey JP (2010) Kluyveromyces marxianus: A yeast emerging
from its sister’s shadow. Fungal Biol Rev 24: 17–26.
74. Dragone G, Mussatto SI, Almeida e Silva JB, Teixeira JA (2011) Optimal
fermentation conditions for maximizing the ethanol production by
Kluyveromyces fragilis from cheese whey powder. Biomass and Bioenergy
35: 1977–1982.
75. Gabardo S, Pereira GF, Rech R, Ayub MAZ (2015) The modeling of ethanol
production by Kluyveromyces marxianus using whey as substrate in
continuous A-Stat bioreactors. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 42: 1243-1253.
76. Gabardo S, Pereira GF, Klein MP, Rech R, Hertz PF, et al.(2016) Dynamics
of yeast immobilized-cell fluidized-bed bioreactors systems in ethanol
fermentation from lactose-hydrolyzed whey and whey permeate. Bioprocess
Biosyst Eng 39: 141-150.
77. Jain DK, Tyagi RD, Kluepfel D, Agbebavi TJ (1991) Production of propionic
acid from whey ultrafiltrate by immobilized cells of Propionibacterium
shermanii in batch process. Process Biochem 26: 217-223.
78. Gupta A, Srivastava AK (2001) Continuous Propionic Acid Production from
Cheese Whey Using In Situ Spin Filter. Biotechnol Bioprocess Eng 6: 1-5.
79. Alam S, Stevens D, Bajpai R (1988) Production of butyric acid by batch
fermentation of cheese whey with Clostridium beijerinckii. J Ind Microbiol 2:
359-364.
80. Arslan NP, Aydogan MN, Taskin M (2016) Citric acid production from partly
deproteinized whey under non-sterile culture conditions using immobilized
cells of lactose-positive and cold-adapted Yarrowia lipolytica B9. J Biotechnol
231: 232–239.
81. Raganati F, Olivieri G, Procentese A, Russo ME, Salatino P, Marzocchella A
(2013) Butanol production by bioconversion of cheese whey in a continuous
packed bed reactor. Bioresour Technol 138: 259-265.
82. Becerra M, Cerdán ME, González-Siso MI (2015) Biobutanol from cheese
whey. Microb Cell Fact 14:27.
83. Nath K, Das D (2011) Modeling and optimization of fermentative hydrogen
production. Bioresour Technol 102: 8569-8581.
84. Kargi F, Uzunca
̧r S (2013) Valorization of cheese whey by electrohydrolysis
for hydrogen gas production and COD removal. Waste and Biomass
Valorization 4: 517-528.
85. Dobowski M, Korzeniewska E, Filipkowska Z, Zielieski M, Kwiatkowski R.
(2014) Possibility of hydrogen production during cheese whey fermentation
process by different strains of psychrophilic bacteria. Int J Hydrogen Energy
39:1972–8. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.11.082.
86. Ferreira Rosa PR, Santos SC, Silva EL (2014) Different ratios of carbon
sources in the fermentation of cheese whey and glucose as substrates for
hydrogen and ethanol production in continuous reactors. Int J Hydrogen
Energy 39: 1288-1296.
87. Castro-Mayorga JL, Martínez-Abad A, Fabra MJ, Olivera C, Reis M,
Lagarón JM (2014) Stabilization of antimicrobial silver nanoparticles by a
polyhydroxyalkanoate obtained from mixed bacterial culture. Int J Biol
Macromol 71: 103–110.
88. Colombo B, Sciarria TP, Reis M, Scaglia B, Adani F (2016)
Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHAs) production from fermented cheese whey by
using a mixed microbial culture. Bioresour Technol 218: 692-699.
89. Gouveia AR, Freitas EB, Galinha CF, Carvalho G, Duque AF, et al. (2017)
Dynamic change of pH in acidogenic fermentation of cheese whey towards
polyhydroxyalkanoates production: Impact on performance and microbial
population. N Biotechnol 37: 1080-116.
90. Akhtar P, Gray JI, Asghar A. Synthesis of lipids by certain yeast strains grown
on whey permeate (1998) J Food Lipids 5:283–97. doi:10.1111/j.1745-
4522.1998.tb00125.x.
91. Castanha RF, Mariano AP, de Morais LAS, Scramin S, Monteiro RTR. (2014)
Optimization of lipids production by Cryptococcus laurentii 11 using cheese
whey with molasses. Brazilian J Microbiol 45:379–87. doi:10.1590/S1517-
83822014000200003.
92. Espinosa-Gonzalez I, Parashar A, Bressler DC (2014) Heterotrophic growth
and lipid accumulation of Chlorella protothecoides in whey permeate, a dairy
by-product stream, for biofuel production. Bioresour Technol 155:170–6.
doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2013.12.028.
93. Belem MAF, Gibbs BF, Lee BH (1997) Enzymatic production of ribonucleotides
from autolysates of Kluyveromyces marxianus grown on whey. J Food Sci 62:
851-857.
94. Húngaro HM, Calil NO, Ferreira AS, Chandel AK, Silva SSD (2013)
Fermentative production of ribonucleotides from whey by Kluyveromyces
marxianus: Effect of temperature and pH. J Food Sci Technol 50: 958-964.
95. Sun ML, Liu SB, Qiao LP, Chen XL, Pang X, et al. (2014) A novel
exopolysaccharide from deep-sea bacterium Zunongwangia profunda SM-
A87: Low-cost fermentation, moisture retention, and antioxidant activities.
Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 98: 7437-7445.
96. Zhou F, Wu Z, Chen C, Han J, Ai L, et al. (2014) Exopolysaccharides produced
by Rhizobium radiobacter S10 in whey and their rheological properties. Food
Hydrocoll 36: 362-368.
97. Chen Z, Shi J, Yang X, Nan B, Liu Y, et al. (2015) Chemical and physical
characteristics and antioxidant activities of the exopolysaccharide produced
by Tibetan kefir grains during milk fermentation. Int Dairy J 43: 15-21.
98. Farnworth ER (2005) Kefir – a complex probiotic. Food Sci Technol Bull Funct
Foods 2:1–17. doi:10.1616/1476-2137.13938.
99. Nielsen B, Gürakan GC, Ünlü G (2014) Kefir: A Multifaceted Fermented
DairyProduct. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins 6: 123-135.
100. Gradova NB, Khokhlacheva AA, Murzina ED, Myasoyedova VV (2015)
Microbial components of kefir grains as exopolysaccharide kefiran producers.
Appl Biochem Microbiol 51: 873-880.
101. Frengova GI, Simova ED, Beshkova DM, Simov ZI (2002)
Exopolysaccharides produced by lactic acid bacteria of kefir grains. Zeitschrift
Fur Naturforsch - Sect C J Biosci 57:805–10. doi:10.1515/znc-2002-9-1009.
102. Maeda H, Zhu X, Omura K, Suzuki S, Kitamura S (2004) Effects of an
exopolysaccharide (kefiran) on lipids, blood pressure, blood glucose, and
constipation. Biofactors 22:197–200. doi:10.1002/biof.5520220141.
103. Rodrigues KL, Carvalho JCT, Schneedorf JM (2005) Anti-inflammatory
properties of kefir and its polysaccharide extract. Inflammopharmacology
13:485–92. doi:10.1163/156856005774649395.
104. Pop C, Apostu S, Salanţă L, Rotar AM, Sindic M, Mabon N, et al. (2014)
Influence of Different Growth Conditions on the Kefir Grains Production, used
in the Kefiran Synthesis. Bull UASVM Food Sci Technol 71:2344–2344.
doi:10.15835/buasvmcn-fst:10802.
105. Dailin DJ, Elsayed EA, Othman NZ, Malek R, Phin HS, Aziz R, et al. (2016)
Bioprocess development for kefiran production by Lactobacillus
kefiranofaciens in semi industrial scale bioreactor. Saudi J Biol Sci 23:495–
502. doi:10.1016/j.sjbs.2015.06.003.
106. Illanes A. Lactose: Production and upgrading. Lact. Prebiotics A Process
Perspect., 2016, p. 1–33. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-802724-0.00001-9.
107. Vera C, Guerrero C, Conejeros R, Illanes A (2012) Synthesis of galacto-
oligosaccharides by β-galactosidase from Aspergillus oryzae using partially
dissolved and supersaturated solution of lactose. Enzyme Microb Technol
50:188–94. doi:10.1016/j.enzmictec.2011.12.003.
108. Fischer C, Kleinschmidt T. Synthesis of galactooligosaccharides using sweet
and acid whey as a substrate. Int Dairy J 2015;48:15–22.
doi:10.1016/j.idairyj.2015.01.003.
109. Kovacs Z, Benjamins E, Grau K, Ur Rehman A, Ebrahimi M, Czermak P
(2013) Recent developments in manufacturing oligosaccharides with
prebiotic functions. Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol 143:257–95.
doi:10.1007/10_2013_237.
110. Rodriguez-Colinas B, Fernandez-Arrojo L, Santos-Moriano P, Ballesteros A,
Plou F (2016) Continuous Packed Bed Reactor with Immobilized β-
Galactosidase for Production of Galactooligosaccharides (GOS). Catalysts
6:189. doi:10.3390/catal6120189.

Citation: Pais Chanfrau JM, Núñez Pérez J, Lara Fiallos MV, Rivera Intriago LM, Abril Porras VH, Cuaran Guerrero MJ, Trujillo Toledo LE (2017) Milk
Whey- From a Problematic Byproduct to a Source of Valuable Products. Prensa Med Argent 2017, 103:4
for Health and Industry: An Overview from Biotechnology. Prensa Med Argent 103:4
doi: 10.4172/lpma.1000257
Volume 103 • Issue 4 • 1000257
•
Pa ge 11 of 11
•
111. Corzo-Martínez M, Copoví P, Olano A, Moreno FJ, Montilla A (2013)
Synthesis of prebiotic carbohydrates derived from cheese whey permeate
by a combined process of isomerisation and transgalactosylation. J Sci Food
Agric 93:1591–7. doi:10.1002/jsfa.5929.
112. Torres DPM, Gonçalves MPF, Teixeira JA, Rodrigues LR (2010) Galacto-
Oligosaccharides: Production, properties, applications, and significance as
prebiotics. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf 9: 438-454.
113. Andorrà I, Berradre M, Rozès N, Mas A, Guillamón JM, et al (2010) Effect of
pure and mixed cultures of the main wine yeast species on grape must
fermentations. Euro Food Research Technol 231: 215-224.
114. Colinas BR (2013) Obtención Enzimática, Caracterización y Propiedades
Prebióticas De Oligosacáridos Empleados En Leches Infantiles, Universidad
Autónoma de Madrid (UAM), Madrid, Spain.
115. Petrides D (2003) Bioseparations Science and Engineering, Oxford
University Press, USA.
116. Peters MS, Timmerhaus KD, Ronald EW (2004) Plant design and economics
for chemical engineers.(5th edtn), McGraw-Hill, USA.
117. Schultz N, Chang L, Hauck A, Reuss M, Syldatk C (2006) Microbial
production of single-cell protein from deproteinized whey concentrates. Appl
Microbiol Biotechnol 69: 515-520.
Author Affiliations Top
1 Grupo de Investigación de Lácteos (GILAC). Facultad de Ingeniería en
Ciencias Agropecuarias y Ambientales (FICAYA). Universidad Técnica del
Norte (UTN). Ave. 17 de julio, 5-21, y Gral. José Ma. de Córdova, CP 100105,
Ibarra, Imbabura, Ecuador. (jmpais@utn.edu.ec)
2 Universidad Técnica de Machala, Machala, El Oro, Ecuador.
3 Unidad de Post-grado de la Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos-Perú.
4 Industrial Biotechnology and Bioproducts Research Group, Center for
Nanoscience and Nanotecnology, CENCINAT, Universidad de las Fuerzas
Armadas (ESPE), Ave. Rumiñahui s/n. Quito, Pichincha, Ecuador.
(letrujillo3@espe.edu.ec)
Submit your next manuscript and get advantages of SciTechnol
submissions
 80
Journals
 21 Day rapid review
process
 3000 Editorial
team
 5 Million
readers
 More than
5000
 Quality and quick review processing through Editorial Manager
System
Submit your next manuscript at
●
www
.scitechnol.
com/
submission