Table 7.
Species | Heating conditions | N | Percentage of samples with ALP [mU/L] values | Reference | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
< 100 | 100–200 | 201–300 | 301–350 | 351–400 | 401–500 | > 501–600 | 601–800 | 801–1,000 | > 1,000 | ||||
Cow | NA | 2,761 | 93.3 | 4.1 | 0.7 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0 | 0.1 | 0.9 | PHEc |
Total cow | 2,761 | 93.3 | 4.1 | 0.7 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0 | 0.1 | 0.9 | ||
Buffalo | LTLTa | 421 | 23.0 | 50.8 | 20.9 | 4.5 | 0.7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | IZSLT (2020) |
Buffalo | NA | 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Questionnaire |
Total buffalo | 423 | 23.5 | 50.8 | 20.9 | 4.5 | 0.7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Goat | LTLTa | 157 | 55.4 | 35.7 | 7.6 | 1.3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | IZSLT (2020) |
Goat | NAb | 65 | 87.7 | 12.3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Rola and Sosnowski (2010) |
Goat | NAb | 75 | 86.7 | 13.3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Rola and Sosnowski (2011) |
Goat | NA | 606 | 85.1 | 11.4 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0 | 0 | 0.5 | Questionnaire + PHEc + Berger et al. (2008)d |
Total goat | 903 | 80.3 | 15.8 | 2.7 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 | 0.3 | ||
Sheep | LTLTa | 290 | N/A | 15.9* | 50.3 | 20 | 8.62 | 4.5 | 0.7** | IZSLT (2020) | |||
Sheep | NA | 86 | 24.4 | 27.9 | 18.6 | 4.7 | 2.3 | 7.0 | 3.5 | 1.2 | 2.3 | 8.1 | Questionnaire + PHEc + Berger et al. (2008)d |
Total sheep | 376 | 5.6 | 18.6 | 43.1 | 16.5 | 7.2 | 5.1 | 1.3 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 1.9 |
NA: details about the heat treatment method or conditions used are not available; N/A: not applicable; N: number of samples tested; *< 200 mU/L; ** > 500 mU/L.
The raw milk samples collected between 2017 and 2020 have been pasteurised at laboratory scale using 63°C ± 0.5°C for 30 min.
Samples of pasteurised milk taken from retail stores.
These data are from routine samples and may contain samples that were not correctly pasteurised.
Samples have been pasteurised but the conditions used are unknown.