Surveillance of Milk Adulteration and It

Advances in Biochemistry & Biotechnology
http://biosciencejournals.org
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Surveillance of milk adulteration and its impact on

physical characteristics of milk
Ghulam Shabir Barham1, Muhammad Khaskheli1, Aijaz Hussain Soomro2 and Zaheer Ahmed
Nizamani 3
1
Department of Animal Products Technology, 2Institute of Food Sciences and Technology, 3Department
of Veterinary Pathology, Sindh Agriculture University, Tandojam, PAKISTAN.
ABSTRACT
An experiment was designed to screen the various adulterants in the market milk sold in the
coastal area of Sindh province during the year 2014. A total of 100 milk samples were collected
each of twenty (n= 20) from milk producers, milk collectors, middlemen, processors and dairy
shops at the vicinity of Badin brought in the Department of Animal Products Technology,
Faculty of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Sciences, Sindh Agriculture University Tandojam,
Pakistan. Among all milk samples water (76%) was the common adulterant found to be in the
majority of milk samples evaluated in present study, followed by detergent (25%), rice flour
(22 %), caustic soda (18%), salt (17%) and cane sugar (14%), respectively. The extent of
extraneous water in milk samples collected from dairy shops, middlemen and milk collectors was
significantly (P0.05) high than that of samples collected from processor and milk producer. The
proportion of adulteration at all the milk intermediaries was (P0.05) non significant. The pH
value of all milk samples collected from different marketing channels was significantly (P0.05)
different from each other except in samples collected from dairy shops and middlemen.
Significant difference (P<0.05) was observed in freezing point of milk samples collected from all
milk marketing channels. The specific gravity of milk samples collected from all milk marketing
channels was found to be significant (P<0.05) with each other.
Key words: Adulteration, extraneous water, physical characteristics, market milk and Badin.
RECEIVED: 14 FEBRUARY 2015, ACCEPTED: 28 FEBRUARY 2015, AVAILABLE ONLINE: 05 March 2015
1
Volume 1| Issue 1| 2015
INTRODUCTION
Milk is the best and cheapest source of nutrition and an article of daily diet, easily
accepted and used by all the age groups in rural as well as in urban areas. Milk, if present in its
natural form, has high food value and supplies good quality nutrients like energy providing
lactose and fat, body building proteins, the bone forming calcium, health promoting vitamins and
minerals in significant amount than any other single food (Neumann et al., 2002). Historical
evidence indicates that the nations which used to obtain highest calories from milk and milk
products were more civilized and capable of having sound administration and such societies enjoy
almost complete freedom from nutritional disease. In contrast, the poorly or underdeveloped areas
of the world have a primitive or non-existent milk supply and have numerous inhabitants suffering
from nutritional deficiency, especially infants and children (Hoppe et al., 2006). No doubt, milk is
a perishable commodity and is likely to be spoiled during summer season when weather becomes
very hot (Tipu et al., 2007). Unfortunately, due to unorganized and non-regulated marketing
systems, the quality of milk is hardly maintained at consumer level (Javaid et al., 2009). In order
to keep milk temporarily fresh, some unethical activities are usually adapted to prevent the
financial losses due to the spoilage of milk during its transportation and sale (Naz, 2000). It has
been observed that adulteration of milk is one of the most serious issues that the dairy sector of
Pakistan is today facing, causing not only major economic losses for the processing industry, but
also a major health risk for the consumers. Due to the spread of small holding farmers and
consequent supply chain complexities, milk handling processes in the traditional system are
extremely unhygienic and there is no enforcement of standards, so the result is poor quality
products. In order to keep milk temporarily fresh, middlemen commonly add ice to the milk,
which results in dilution of milk solids. Compounding the problem, middlemen attempt to counter
the dilution by adding vegetable oil, starch, flour, sugarcane, whey powder, skim milk powder,
and other ingredients to extend the solid content of the milk (Fakhar et al., 2006). Besides, some
adulterants like detergent are used to enhance the cosmetic nature of milk. When water is added in
milk, its foamy appearance diminishes, so to give milk a foamy appearance artificially detergents
are added in it. Hair removing powders (calcium thioglycolate/potassium thioglycolate/calcium
salts of thiogycolic acid) and urea are added for whitening of milk and giving it genuine look.
Only few grams of urea are enough to bring milk in its original state (Walker et al., 2004). The
adulteration of milk may cause significant problems for human health for example; the milk
adulterated with contaminated water is a serious health hazard because of potential waterborne
diseases. Other adulterants like detergents, urea, starch, caustic soda, formalin, hydrogen peroxide
and other synthetic components may cause impairments, food poisoning, gastroenteritis, vomiting,
nausea, renal failure, liver damage, heart problems, cancer or even death in all age groups (Butt,
2

2011; Clare et al., 2003). Feeling gravity of problem, present work has been designed on the
influence of various adulterations on physicochemical characteristics of milk.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Collection of milk samples
A total of 100 unprocessed market milk samples were purchased from different milk
marketing channels like; milk producer, milk collector, middleman, processor and dairy shop at
the vicinity of Badin district for the detection of the various adulterants and analysis of physicochemical characteristics of milk.
Assessment of various adulterants
All the market milk samples were screened for the presence of various adulterants
through commercially available milk adulteration testing kit and methods reported by Khaskheli
(2010) and Tipu (2012).
Presence of extraneous water
The presence of extraneous water in market milk was detected from depression of freezing
point through Cryoscope as reported by Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC, 2000).
The value of freezing point of market milk greater than the values of freezing point of control was
assumed as presence of extraneous water in market.
Extent of extraneous water in market milk
Extent of extraneous water in market milk was observed from the depression of freezing
point (through Cryoscope) and calculated by subtracting the observed freezing point of market milk
from that of freezing point of base (control) and thereafter by dividing it with freezing point of base
(AOAC, 2000) using following formula.
Freezing point base observed freezing point

% water added =
100
Freezing point base
3

Physical Analysis
pH value
The pH value of market milk samples was recorded using pH meter as according to the
method of AOAC (2000). The milk sample was taken in to a beaker, electrodes along with
temperature probe was inserted to sample. The constant reading appeared on pH meter base was
noted and recorded as pH value of milk sample.
Freezing point
Freezing point of market milk samples was determined according to the method of
AOAC (2000) using Cryoscope. Milk sample was loaded on the Cryoscope. The constant
reading appeared on the screen of Cryoscope was noted and recorded as freezing point of milk
sample.
Specific gravity
Specific gravity of market milk samples was determined according to the method of
Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC, 2000) using pycnometer. The density of
milk was measured against the density of standard (water).The pre-weighed pycnometer was
filled with standard reference fluid (water) to some pre-determined level at 20oC and weight was
taken. Similarly, pre- prepared milk sample was filled in pycnometer at similar level and
temperature, and weighed. Specific gravity of milk was calculated by the following formula:
Statistical analysis
The data were analyzed through computerized statistical package i.e. Student Edition of
Statistix (SXW), Version 8.1 (Copyright 2005, Analytical Software, USA). The data so obtained
was tabulated and analyzed through statistical procedure of summary statistics, under which
Descriptive statistics was applied to observe the variability in the data. The data was further
analyzed through statistical procedure of analysis of variance (ANOVA) to observe the significant
differences among the variables and in case of the significant differences exist; the means were
further computed using least significant difference (LSD) at 5% level of probability.
4

RESULT
Assessment of various adulterants
Market milk samples randomly obtained from different areas of Badin district were
examined for adulteration. Milk was mainly adulterated with water, rice flour, cane sugar,
caustic soda, sodium chloride and detergent. The water (76%) was common adulterant found to
be in all the milk samples evaluated under present study, while detergent was another adulterant
detected in 25% of milk samples from a total of 100 samples. Further, among 100 milk samples
22% were positive for rice flour, 18% for caustic soda, 17% for salt (sodium chloride) and 14%
for cane sugar (Figure-1).
76.0
Positive (%)
80.0
(n= 100)
60.0
40.0
22.0
14.0
18.0
25.0
17.0
20.0
0.0
Adulterants
Figur-1 Positive percentage of different adulterants detected in market milk samples

at the surrounding area of Badin district.
5

Extent of extraneous water in market milk samples
Extent of extraneous water of milk sold by different milk marketing channels was
detected from the depression of freezing point. The average extent of added water in milk
samples collected from dairy shops was recorded as 46.403.47% followed by milk samples
collected from of middlemen (41.452.90%), milk collectors (35.32.80%) processors
(27.504.52%) and milk producers (7.622.08%). Statistical analysis (LSD, 0.05) revealed that
the extent of extraneous water in milk samples collected from dairy shops, middlemen and milk
collectors was significantly (P0.05) high than that of samples collected from processor and milk
producer (Figure-2).
Extent of extraneous water (%)
46.40a
50.0
45.0
40.0
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
41.45ab
35.91bc
27.50c
7.62d
Milk marketing channels
LSD (0.05) =
9.153
SE
=
4.610
Figure-2 Extent of extraneous water in market milk sold by different marketing
channels at surrounding area of Badin district.
6

Proportion of adulteration at the milk intermediaries (milk selling points)
The proportion of milk adulteration at dairy shops was calculated as 3.0181.29% which
was relatively higher than other milk marketing channels, followed by middlemen (2.85284.28
%), milk collectors (1.85180.10%) processors (1.10246.32%) and milk producers
(0.40248.68%), respectively. However, the statistical analysis (ANOVA) showed that the
proportion of adulteration at all the milk intermediaries was (P0.05) non significant (Figure-3).
0.40
Milk Intermediaries
3.00
1.85
Milk Producer
Milk Collector
Middleman
Processor
1.10
2.85
Dairy shop
Adulteration (%)
LSD (0.05)
SE
=
=
2.625
1.322
Figure-3 Proportion of adulteration at different milk marketing channels in the

surrounding area of Badin district.
7

Physical Analysis
pH value
The average pH value of milk samples collected from processors was recorded as
6.920.12 which is comparatively higher than that of samples of other milk marketing channels,
followed by samples collected from milk producers (6.820.01), milk collectors (6.750.02)
dairy shops (6.600.02%) and middlemen (6.560.05%), respectively. Statistical analysis (LSD,
0.05) revealed that the pH value of milk samples collected from processors milk producers and
milk collectors was in normal range. While, the pH value of all milk samples collected from
different marketing channels was significantly (P0.05) different from each other except in
samples collected from dairy shops and middlemen (Figure-4).
pH value
6.92a
6.82b
7
6.9
6.8
6.7
6.6
6.5
6.4
6.3
6.75c
6.56d
6.60d
Milk Intermediaries
LSD (0.05)
SE
=
=
0.076
0.387
Figure-4 pH value of milk samples collected from different milk marketing

channels in the surrounding area of Badin district.
8

Freezing point
The average freezing point of control milk was recorded as -0.5400.0270C. While the
freezing point of milk samples collected from dairy shops, middlemen and milk collectors was
noted as -0.2920.0100C, -0.3160.0150C and -0.3450.0150C, respectively. Furthermore, the
freezing point of milk samples collected from processors and milk producers were recorded as 0.3920.0250C and -0.4990.0200C, respectively. Due to the adulteration of water in milk at all
milk marketing channels the freezing point of samples was varied from control milk and it goes
towards the freezing point of water which is zero. The least significant difference (LSD, 0.05) of
mean test revealed significant difference (P<0.05) was observed in freezing point of milk
samples collected from all milk marketing channels (Table-1).
Table: 1 Freezing point of market milk sold by different intermediaries at Mirpurkhas.
Freezing point of milk (oC)
Descriptive
measures
Control
Milk
Milk
Producers Collectors
Significance
Middlemen
Processors
Dairy
Shops
Minimum
-0.561
-0.531
-0.456
-0.470
-0.531
-0.371
Maximum
-0.522
-0.213
-0.233
-0.192
-0.231
-0.212
-0.345b
-0.316ab
-0.392c
-0.292a
0.015
0.015
0.025
0.010
Mean*
-0.541d
-0.499d
LSD
P-value (0.05)
SE
0.000
SE
0.027
0.020
*Means with different letters in same row varied significantly from one another.
Specific gravity
The average specific gravity of milk samples collected from milk producers was recorded
as 1.0310.0004, only specific gravity of samples collected from milk producers were in the
normal range of control milk. Moreover, the specific gravity of milk samples collected from
processors, milk collectors, middlemen and dairy shops was recorded as 1.0290.0003,
1.0270.0004, 1.0260.0005 and 1.0220.0008, respectively. The least significant difference
9
0.0448
0.0226
(LSD, 0.05) of mean test revealed significant difference (P<0.05) in the specific gravity of milk
samples collected from all milk marketing channels (Figure-5).
1.031a
1.029b
1.032
1.027c
1.03
Specific gravity
1.028
1.026c
1.022d
1.026
1.024
1.022
1.02
1.018
1.016
LSD (0.05)
SE
=
=
0.0001
0.00007
Figure-5 Specific gravity of milk samples collected from different milk marketing
channels in the surrounding area of Badin district.
DISCUSSION
Screening of different adulterants
Milk adulteration, poor hygiene, malpractices, lack of preservation technology, cooling
facilities and sanitation conditions are the main causes of losses in quality of milk (Haasnoot et
al., 2004). It was reported that milk supply is reduced in summer due to fall (55%) in milk
production and increase in demand (60%) compared to winter when milk supply is ample. To
cope with demand, water is admixed with whole milk to increase the volume of milk during
summer season Butt (2011). The water was common adulterant found to be in majority of milk
10

samples (76%) evaluated in present study. Similarly, Beniwal and Khetarpaul (1999) reported
that the main adulterant in milk was water and it was found to be in 70% samples, Lateef et al.
(2009) found 93.33% samples of milk adulterated with water. While, Ahmed (2009) reported
that the 95% fresh milk sold in the Khartoum state of Sudan was also adulterated with water. It
has been noticed that addition of water to normal whole milk was assumed to increase the
quantity of milk. Gawalas/dhodis tend to mix muddy water rather than clean tap water in order to
increase density and keep milk thick, it is not only reduces the nutritional value of milk but
contaminated water may also pose a health risk (Bhatti, 2010; Butt, 2011; Pitty, 2011). The
proportion of samples adulterated with various adulterants varied in different studies. Other
adulterants like detergent (25%), rice flour (22%), caustic soda (18%), salt (17%) and cane sugar
(14%) were also detected during present study. When water is added in milk, its foamy
appearance diminishes, so to give milk a foamy appearance and to enhance its cosmetic nature
artificially detergents were used (Walker et al., 2004; Manish et al., 2000). Barham et al. (2014)
reported that the milk consumed at Hyderabad, Mirpurkhas and Shaheed Benazirabad was
adulterated with detergent, rice flour, caustic soda, salt and cane sugar. Lateef et al. (2009)
reported 93.33% samples positive to cane sugar. It is of interest to note that the middle men
attempt to counter the dilution by adding cane sugar to extend the solids content of the milk or as
additives for the purpose of masking the effect of dilution of water (Singhal et al., 1997).
Waldekar et al., (2011) reported that 8% samples in summer, 4% in rainy and 3% in winter
season were found adulterated with salt among total 120 samples analyzed in 3 different seasons.
The presence of sodium chloride in milk was also detected by Pitty (2011) in samples examined
from Assam area.
Extent of extraneous water
In the present study the extent of extraneous water in milk samples collected from dairy
shops, middlemen and milk collectors was found to be higher than that of samples collected from
processor and milk producer. Similar findings have been reported by Nida et al. (2013); Bhatt et
al. (2008), they reported that the extent of extraneous water was found to be higher in market
milk samples as compared to dairy farms and by milk producers. Present findings are in
agreement with that of Wadekar and Menkudale (2011), who reported the vendors and dairy
shop keeper are highly, adulterated the milk with water to increase their profit. The percentage of
extraneous water was found to be higher in milk samples collected from milk vendors than dairy
farms For the fulfillment of the gap between demand and supply different milk marketing dealers
adulterated the milk by adding water which is probably carried out during the handling of milk
starting from milking till it reaches the consumer or end user. Milk dealers also add dirty ice to
11

increase the shelf life of milk which is also one of the reasons of elevated level of extraneous
water in milk samples (Zia, 2006; Zia, 2007; Tariq, 2001).
Proportion of adulteration at the milk marketing channels
In the present study the proportion of milk adulteration at dairy shops was found to be
relatively higher than middlemen, milk collectors, processors and milk producers. The findings
of present study are in agreement with Zia, (2007) and Tariq (2001). They reported that in
Pakistan raw milk is distributed by a traditional system which involves middlemen called
Gawalas. These milk dealers; middlemen and dairy shop keepers adulterate milk to maximize
their profit. The results of present study are also supported by Barham et al. (2014).They
reported that the percentage of adulteration at dairy shops, milk collectors and middlemen was
found remarkably higher than that of processors and milk producers.
Physical characteristics
pH
In the present study the pH value of milk samples collected from processors milk
producers and milk collectors was in normal range. While, the pH value of remaining milk
samples collected from middlemen and dairy shops was recorded low and not in normal range.
The findings of the present study are in agreement with the results of Memon (2014), who
reported that the addition of water and other adulterants in milk affect the pH value of milk.
These results are also in line with that of reported by Javaid et al. (2009) reported that the pH of
milk from Direct Seller, Milk Collection Center and that of Dairy Farm milk. In another study,
same pH values of milk samples were also observed (Gran et al., 2003).
Freezing point
In the present study freezing point of control milk was recorded as -0.5400.0270C.
While the freezing point of milk samples collected from dairy shops, middlemen and milk
collectors was noted as -0.2920.0100C, -0.3160.0150C and -0.3450.0150C, respectively.
While, the freezing point of milk samples collected from processors and milk producers were
recorded as -0.3920.0250C and -0.4990.0200C, respectively. Present findings are in
accordance with the results of Meredith et al. (2007), who reported that milk containing
extraneous amount of water will have a grossly elevated freezing point. Addition of extraneous
water in milk will have adverse effect on freezing point and nutritional quality (Nida et al., 2013;
Meredith et al., 2007).
12

Specific gravity
In the present study the specific gravity of milk samples collected from milk producers
was recorded as 1.0310.0004, only specific gravity of samples collected from milk producers
were in the normal range of control milk. Moreover, the specific gravity of milk samples
collected from processors, milk collectors, middlemen and dairy shops was recorded as
1.0290.0003, 1.0270.0004, 1.0260.0005 and 1.0220.0008, respectively. These results are in
agreement with the results of Memon (2014), who reported that significant influence of
extraneous water was found on the specific gravity of milk. Present findings are in agreement
with that of Wadekar and Menkudale (2011), who reported the lower (1.0139) specific gravity of
highly adulterated milk obtained from vendors. In another study the specific gravity of milk from
different agencies like direct seller (1.026), milk collection center (1.026), milk vendor shops
(1.026) and hotels (1.027) were remarkably (P<0.001) lower than that of dairy farm milk (1.031)
Javaid et al. (2009). Similarly Memon (2014) conformed that the addition of water had
significant influence on the specific gravity of milk.
CONCLUSION
The water was the common adulterant found to be in market milk sold in vicinity of
Badin followed by detergent, rice flour, caustic soda, salt and cane sugar.
The extent of extraneous water and proportion of adulteration at dairy shops, milk
collectors and middlemen was significantly found to be higher as compared to processors
and milk producers.
Specific gravity was decreased, freezing point was increased and pH also changed
towards neutral by the addition of extraneous water in milk.
Acknowledgement
Higher Education Commission Islamabad, Pakistan.
Department of Animal Products Technology, Faculty of Animal Husbandry and
Veterinary Sciences, Sindh Agriculture University Tandojam, Pakistan.
13

REFERENCES
Ahmed, AAH. (2009). Milk adulteration by adding water and starch at Khartoum state,
Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, 8 (4):439-443.
AOAC, (2000). Official methods of analysis of the association of official analytical
chemists. Inc. Gaithersburg, U.S.A.
Barham, GS, Khaskheli, M, Soomro, AA and Nizamani ZA. 2014. Extent of extraneous
water and detection of various adulterants in market milk at Mirpurkhas, Pakistan.
International Organization of Scientific Research, Journal of Agriculture and
Veterinary Sciences (IOSR-JAVS) 7(3): 83-89.
Beniwal, A and Khetarpaul, N. (1999). Knowledge of consumers regarding the nature
and extent of adulteration of Indian foods. Nutrition Health, 13 (3):153-60.
Bhatti, MY. (2010). Formalin in milk consultancy report of Lahore High court. Free
News alerts sums PT to 9900.
Bhatt, SR, Singh, A and Bhatt, SM. (2008). Assessment of synthetic milk exposure to
children of selected population in Uttar Pradesh, India. Indian Journal of
Research, 7: 22-34.
Butt, MYM. (2011). Seminar on Milk Anti-adulteration policy Policy Draft:
International executive summary dairy report, (IFCN) Pak. Lahore.
Clare DA, Catignani, GL and Swaisgood, HE. 2003. Bio defense properties of milk: The
role of antimicrobial proteins and peptides. Current pharmaceutical design.
Bentham Science Publish. 9 (16): 1239-1255.
Fakhar, H and Law Walker, FG. (2006). The white revolution-dhoodh darya. Pakistan
Dairy Development Company, (pp. 72).
Gran, HM, Wetlesen, A, Mutukumira, AN, Rukure, G and Narvhus, JA.
(2003).Occurrence of pathogenic bacteria in raw milk cultured pasteurized milk
14

and naturally soured milk produced at small scale dairies in Zimbabwe. Food control, 14:
539-544
Haasnoot, W, Smits, NG, Voncken, AEK and Bremer, MG. (2004). Fast biosensor
immunoassays for the detection of cows milk in the milk of ewes and goats.
Journal of Dairy Research, 71, 322329.
Hoppe, C, Molgaard, C, Michelson, KF. (2006). Cow's milk and linear growth in
industrialized and developing countries. Annual Review of Nutrition, 26, 131-173.
Javaid, SB, Gadahi, JA, Khaskheli, M, Bhutto, MB, Kumbher, S and Panhwar, A.H.
(2009). Physical and chemical quality of market milk sold at Tandojam. Pakistan
Journal of Nutrition, 29 (1): 27-31.
Khaskheli, M. (2010). Dairy Laboratory Manual. Department Animal Products
Technology, Faculty Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Sciences, Sindh
Agriculture University, Tandojam. (pp.38).
Lateef, M, Faraz, A, Mustafa, MI, Akhtar, P and Bashir, MK. (2009). Detection of
adulterants and chemical composition of milk supplied to canteens of various
hospitals in Faisalabad city. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, (9):139-142.
Memon, MM. 2014. Surveillance of milk adulteration and its influence on physicochemical characteristics of milk. A thesis submitted to Faculty of Animal
Husbandry and Veterinary Sciences, Sindh Agriculture University Tandojam.
Manish, MP, Singhal, RS and Kulkarni, PR. (2000). An approach to the detection of
synthetic milk in dairy milk, 1. Detection of urea. International Journal of Dairy
Technology, 53. (3): 987-91.
Meredith, P, Williams, P, Zampa, N, Garry, E and Ouattara, G. (2007). The effect of
raw milk storage conditions on freezing point, pH and impedance. Advance
Instruments, INC., (pp: 1-7).
Naz, W. (2000). Subject: The dairy sector. http://www. Pakistaneconomist.com. Accessed
Feb. 2011.
15
Nida, S, Soomro, AH, Sheikh, SA and Khaskheli, M. (2013). Extent of water adulteration
and its influence on physical characteristics of market milk. Pakistan Journal of
Nutrition, 12 (2): 178-181.
Neumann, CG, Harris, DM and Rogers, LM. (2002). Contribution of animal source foods
in improving diet quality and function in children in the developing world.
Nutrition Research, 22: 193-220.
Pitty, (2011). 69 PC milk samples fail quality test some contain detergents. A national
survey on milk adulteration. Conducted by Food Safety and Standards
Authority of India. reported by PTI.
Singhal, RS, Kulkarni, PR and Rege, DV. (1997). Handbook of Indices of food quality
and authenticity. Wood Head Publishing Limited, Cambridge England, (pp.168174).
Tariq,
MA.
2001.
Subject:
A
close
look
at
dietary
http://www.dawn.com/2001/11/05/ebr13. Htm. Accessed Feb, 2011.
patterns
Tipu, MY, Altaf, I, Ashfaq, M and Siddiqui, S. (2007). Introduction. In Proceedings of

the workshop on monitoring of chemical adulterants and hygienic status of market
milk. Lahore, Pakistan: WTO-Quality Control Laboratory, (pp. 7-39).
Wadekar, SB and Menkudale, GV. (2011). Physico-chemical quality of market milk in
Nanded town. Vision Research Review. I (I): (pp.27).
Walker, GP, Dunshea, FR and Doyle, PT. (2004). Effects of nutrition and management
on the production and composition of milk fat and protein. Australian Journal of
Agriculture Research. (55): 1009-1028.
Zia, U. (2006). Analysis of milk marketing chain, Pakistan. FAO. Food Laws Manual.
2006.
Zia, U. (2007). Improved market access and smallholder dairy farmer participation for
sustainable dairy development. Consultancy Report CFC/FIGMDP/ 16FT.
Lessons Learned Study. Islamabad, Pakistan.
16

Surveillance of Milk Adulteration and It

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Surveillance of Milk Adulteration and It

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Advances in Biochemistry & Biotechnology