Next Article in Journal
Enhancement of Bioactive Properties in Momordica charantia by Leuconostoc Fermentation
Previous Article in Journal
Effect of Replacing Fish Meal Using Fermented Soybean Meal on Growth Performance, Intestine Bacterial Diversity, and Key Gene Expression of Largemouth Bass (Micropterus salmoides)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Fermentation
Volume 9
Issue 6
10.3390/fermentation9060522
fermentation-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Fermented Milk Produced with Goat Milk Enriched with PUFA Omega-3 by Supplementation of Diet with Extruded Linseed

by
Nicoletta P. Mangia
*,
Silvia Carta
,
Marco A. Murgia
,
Luigi Montanari
and
Anna Nudda
Dipartimento di Agraria, University of Sassari, Viale Italia, 39, 07100 Sassari, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Fermentation 2023, 9(6), 522; https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation9060522
Submission received: 30 March 2023 / Revised: 23 May 2023 / Accepted: 25 May 2023 / Published: 27 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Fermentation for Food and Beverages)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This research aimed to evaluate goat milk rich in Omega-3 PUFA from animals fed extruded flaxseed as a raw material to produce fermented milk using beneficial lactobacilli. Experimental fermented milks were produced using Lacticaseibacillus paracasei Shirota and two potential probiotic lactobacilli, namely Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus A2 and Lacticaseibacillus paracasei FS109. The fermented milks were produced using milk from goats fed a basal diet without any supplementation (CON) and milk from goats supplemented with 200 g/d of extruded linseed (LIN). All lactobacilli tested grew well both in CON and LIN milk, reaching high numbers during fermentation. The colony count ranged between 8 and 10 Log CFU/mL, despite slow acidification activity, which occurred especially in milk fermented by L. FS109. By contrast, an undesired post-acidification occurred, more pronounced in CON than in LIN milk, which still highlighted the strong acid-tolerance of L. Shirota and L. rhamnosus A2 in particular. This research showed that goat milk enriched in PUFA had no negative effect on the viability of the tested Lactobacilli. Both values of L. Shirota and L. rhamnosus “live cells” throughout the cold storage of the products were higher than those recommended to guarantee the quality of fermented milk products, making them beneficial to consumers’ health.

1. Introduction

Fermented milk is one of the dairy products that better preserves the nutritional properties of the raw material. In fact, the quality of these products is not only strongly related to the quality of milk but also depends on the microorganisms involved in the production process [1]. Among the lactic acid bacteria (LAB), lactobacilli are the most involved in the production of fermented foods of both animal and vegetable origin due to their ability to preserve their raw characteristics. Furthermore, lactobacilli metabolism guarantees microbiological safety and improves the rheological and organoleptic features of the products. Lactobacilli are generally recognized as safe (GRAS) and several strains have been characterized as probiotics, namely “live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host” [2]. Studies have shown that Lactobacilli play an important role in the prevention of several diseases, such as infections [3], colon cancer [4], and allergic food events [5].
To have beneficial effects, probiotic bacteria must reach the gastrointestinal tract alive and in a concentration of at least 106 viable Colony Forming Unit (CFU) per gram [6].
Although milk components can affect the growth rate, acidifying activity, and survival of probiotic lactobacilli during cold storage, goat milk has been reported as a good substrate for probiotic delivery. For this reason, studies on both raw material and lactobacilli are receiving attention from the dairy industry due to strong customer interest in food health.
The quality of raw milk is also crucial to producing healthy food with good nutraceutical properties. Milk with a high concentration of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) n-3 could improve the quality of fermented milk because these FA assert several beneficial effects on human health. PUFA n-3, which are components of phospholipids in cell membranes, could protect against cardiovascular and nervous diseases [7,8]. Some PUFAs, such as conjugated linolenic acid (CLA), have a positive effect against cancer, obesity, and diabetes [9,10]. Ruminant milk represents the main source of CLA in the human diet, so increasing this FA and other PUFA in dairy products could be a good strategy to enhance their intake. The FA profile of milk, and consequently the FA profile of fermented milks, could be improved by animal feeding strategies [11,12]. For example, the use of linseed in ruminant diets increases PUFA concentrations in sheep [11,13,14] and cow [15] milk. PUFA have been used to control bacterial infection [16]: The incorporation of dietary PUFA as EPA and DHA into cell membranes has also been found to promote bacterial killing [17,18]. In addition, the consumption of n-3 PUFA and CLA has been reported to promote desirable changes in the intestinal microbiota of obese humans [19]. The coadministration of probiotics with Omega-3 reduced liver fat, improved serum lipids and metabolic profile, and reduced the chronic systemic inflammatory state in type-2 diabetic patients [20,21]. The combined effect of Omega-3 and L. plantarum has been recently tested on the viability and apoptosis gene expression of cancer cells [22]. These studies have highlighted the role of fatty acids in influencing and regulating the growth of microorganisms. Therefore, understanding bacterial responses to PUFA could lead to better control of microbial behavior. To date, the effects of probiotic lactobacillus strains in the production of fermented milk by using goat milk rich in PUFA have not been evaluated.
In this study, a recognized probiotic Lactobacillus strain (Lacticaseibacillus paracasei Shirota) and two autochthonous lactobacilli isolated from goat milk (Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus A2) and from traditional cheese (Lacticaseibacillus paracasei FS109) with potential probiotic features [23,24] were chosen in order to assess their suitability to produce fermented milk from goat milk rich in PUFA n-3. The technological performances of beneficial LABs have been evaluated.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Animals and Milk Samples

Twenty-four Saanen goats were randomly allocated to two groups homogeneous for milk yield. The first group received a basal diet composed of the pasture (3 or 4 h per day) and 700 g/d of concentrate (CON), while the second group received the same basal diet in addition to 500 g/d of concentrated and 200 g/d of extruded linseed as feed (LIN). Because extruded linseed contains 34.9% of lipids and the C18:3n-3 is 50.2% of the total fat, the selected dose provided 70 g/d of fat and about 35 g/d of C18:3n-3 per animal. The pasture consisted of ryegrass, white and alexandrine clover, and Mediterranean scrubs. The study lasted 4 weeks, and animals were milked twice per day at 07:00 and 17:00. Milk yield (MY) from the morning and evening milking was measured weekly, and bulk milk samples were collected and analyzed for fat, protein, lactose (Milkoscan 6000, Foss Electric, Hillerød, Denmark), and somatic cell count (SCC) (Fossomatic 360, Foss Electric). Gas chromatographic analysis was carried out to determine the FA profile of fermented milk samples following the method described by Correddu et al. [13]. The individual FA and the groups were expressed as g/100 of FAME. The atherogenic index (AI) and thrombogenic index (TI) were calculated as follows: AI = [12:0 + (4 × 14:0) + 16:0]/[(PUFA) + (MUFA)]; TI = (14:0 + 16:0)/[(0.5 × MUFA) + (0.5 × n-6) + (3 × n-3) + (n-3:n-6)]; the hypocholesterolemic to hypercholesterolemic ratio (h/H) was calculated as follows: [(sum of 18:1cis-9, 18:1cis-11, 18:2 n-6, 18:3 n-6, 18:3 n-3, 20:3 n-6, 20:4 n-6, 20:5 n-3, 22:4 n-6, 22:5 n-3 and 22:6 n-3)/(14:0 + 16:0)].

2.2. Experimental Fermented Milks Manufacturing

2.2.1. Bacteria Strains

Lacticaseibacillus paracasei Shirota (L. Shirota) was isolated from the commercial product Yakult (Yakult Honsha Co., Ltd, Tokyo, Japan), while Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus (L.) A2 and Lacticaseibacillus paracasei (L.) FS109 were obtained from our laboratory collection. Cultures were prepared using MRS medium (Oxoid, Milan, Italy) and then incubated at 32 °C in anaerobic conditions using the Gas-Pack anaerobic system (Oxoid, Milan, Italy) for all bacteria strains.
First, bacteria strains were revitalized on an MRS agar plate and incubated in anaerobic conditions for 48 h. Then, one colony was seeded into the tubes containing 10 mL of MRS broth and incubated for 12 h at 32 °C. Finally, the bacterial cultures were grown in pasteurized goat milk.
CFU per mL were measured through serial dilution in Ringer’s solution (Oxoid) on MRS agar plates.

2.2.2. Fermented Milk Manufacturing

Fermented milk was produced in a pilot scale using CON and LIN goat milk treated at 92 °C for 10 min. Goat milk cooled at 32 °C was divided in three batches and inoculated with (1) L. Shirota, (2) L. rhamnosus A2, (3) L. paracasei FS109 at 1% (v/v) (the final content was about 106 CFU mL−1) and incubated at 32 °C per 24 h, then stored at 5 °C for 30 days.

2.2.3. Lactobacillus Viable Counts and Acidity Values Determination

For microbiological analysis, 10 g of sample were homogenized in 90 mL sterile Ringer’s solution for 2 min in a Stomacher Lab Blender 80 (PBI, Milan, Italy). Aliquots of 1 mL were 10-fold diluted in Ringer’s solution and inoculated on MRS agar to quantify lactobacilli. Plates were incubated anaerobically at 32 °C for 48 h.
The pH value was determined with a pH-meter (Crison Instruments SA, Barcelona, Spain). Acidity determination was carried out in 10 mL of fermented milk titrated with 0.l N NaOH, with phenolphthalein as indicator, and expressed as the percentage of lactic acid. Both colony counts and acidity parameters were determined at 0, 3, 6, 9, and 24 h of incubation (32 °C), and at 15- and 30-days during cold (5 °C) storage.

2.2.4. Statistical Analysis

The data of milk yield, milk composition, and FA profile were analyzed using ANOVA, based on the generalized linear model procedure of SAS (SAS software 9.2), in which the diet was considered as fixed effect. All the experimental microbiological trials were performed in duplicate and, for each trial, analyses were carried in triplicate. Means values of microbiological and physicochemical results were analyzed using the one-way ANOVA or Tukey method (p < 0.05) in case of significant differences between samples. Statistical analysis was performed using SAS (software 9.2).

3. Results

3.1. Milk Yield, Milk Composition and Fatty Acid Profile

The effects of the extruded linseed supplementation to goats on milk yield, milk composition, and FA profile are shown in Table 1.
Milk yield was not affected significantly by the diet despite a decrease of 7.6% in LIN compared to the CON group (p = 0.644). Milk fat and protein contents did not differ between the two experimental groups. The linseed supplementation determined a substantial increase in PUFA-n3 and a decrease in SFA in milk from LIN compared to milk from CON (Table 1). In fact, the PUFA concentrations in milk from CON and LIN were 5.75 and 7.60 g/100 g of FAME, respectively. The milk from the LIN group showed a numerical decrease in some short and medium chain fatty acids, such as C10:0, C12:0, and a significant decrease in C14:0. The content of C16:0 was markedly reduced in LIN compared to CON (p < 0.001), whereas the C18:0 and C18:1 cis-9 were higher in LIN milk (p < 0.05).
Milk from goats fed linseed is also richer in CLA cis9, trans11, and C18:1 trans11 than milk from the CON group. In particular, CLA cis9, trans11 reached twice the level in LIN compared to CON (0.70 and 1.4 g/100 g of FA, respectively). In line with the diet concentration of C18:3n3, this FA showed a greater concentration in milk from LIN compared to the CON group. The nutritional indices AI and TI were lower, whereas the h/H was higher in milk obtained from goats fed linseed in comparison to control milk.

3.2. Fermented Milks

The growth and acidification ability of L. Shirota, L. rhamnosus A2 and L. paracasei FS109 strains were evaluated on CON and LIN milk. Figure 1, Figure 2 and Figure 3 show the temporal evolution of lactobacilli during fermentation (0, 3, 6, 9 and 24 h) and cold storage (15 and 30 days).
Overall, all the lactobacilli considered grew well in both CON and LIN milk, reaching the highest numbers after 24 h of fermentation, especially the L. Shirota (Figure 1), in which the concentration exceeded 10 and 9 Log CFU/mL in CON and LIN milk, respectively.
A different behavior of the three lactobacilli was observed at each time point during the fermentation phase. At the beginning of fermentation (3 h), the concentration of L. Shirota (Figure 1) increased in CON milk, whereas it decreased significantly in LIN milk (p < 0.05). As fermentation progressed, although the L. Shirota population continued to increase, a slower growth rate in LIN than in CON milk was observed. At 15 days of storage, L. Shirota decreased in CON fermented milk compared to 24 h and remained fairly stable at 30 days of storage. No differences in the viability of L. Shirota were observed in LIN fermented milk from 24 h until 30 days of storage.
The L. rhamnosus A2 viability (Figure 2) evidenced a similar pattern in both fermented milk until 9 h, but at the end of fermentation time (24 h), L. rhamnosus A2 cell count resulted higher in LIN (9.82 Log) compared to CON milk (8.19 Log). During all storage times, a high number of L. rhamnosus A2 strain remained viable (9 UFC/mL), especially in LIN milk. Similar behavior was observed in CON milk, even if L. rhamnosus A2 decreased after 15 days of storage.
The growth ability of L. paracasei FS109 was not significantly different between CON and LIN milk (Figure 3), both during fermentation and storage time (p > 0.05). Nonetheless, an increase of 1 Log in CON milk from 0 to 3 h was observed. During the fermentation time (24 h), the L. paracasei increased by one Log in both milks, maintained the concentration during the first 15 days of storage, and then decreased from 8 to 7 Log at 30 days of cold storage (Figure 3).
The results of pH and lactic acid (%) analyses on CON and LIN milk fermented by L. Shirota, L. rhamnosus A2, and L. paracasei FS109 are summarized in Figure 4, Figure 5 and Figure 6. All lactobacilli demonstrated slow acidifying activity throughout the fermentation period, especially in LIN milk. At 24 h after fermentation, the pH values of CON milk fermented by L. Shirota was lower (4.53) compared to LIN milk (4.97), whereas no significant differences (p > 0.05) were observed in the amount of lactic acid (circa 0.6%).
The two other lactobacilli showed a lower acidifying ability, both in terms of pH and lactic acid content (Figure 5 and Figure 6).
In particular, the L. paracasei FS109 showed very low acidifying activity during the fermentation period, as evidenced by the pH values above 5 and by the low percentages of lactic acid (about 0.6%) produced in both types of milk (Figure 6).
However, during the first 15 days of storage, the highest acidifying activity was obtained by L. Shirota in CON (pH = 3.90; lactic acid = 1.16%) and in LIN milk (pH = 4.08; lactic acid = 0.98%), followed by L. rhamnosus A2, which was able to acidify CON and LIN milk up to a pH value of 4.10 and 4.08 and lactic acid of 1.0 and 0.92%, respectively.
At the early stage of storage (from 15 to 30 days), the acidity of both milks fermented by L. Shirota and L. rhamnosus A2 continued to increase. A decrease in pH value of about 3.7 and an increase in lactic acid of 1–2% were observed in all samples mentioned above, emphasizing that a strong post-acidification has occurred.
The low acidifying activity of L. paracasei FS109 observed during the fermentation of both milks was also confirmed during the storage time since a very small change in pH values and in lactic acid content was observed (Figure 6).

4. Discussion

Linseed supplementation at a dose of 200 g/d increased the content of C18:3n3 and total PUFA-n3 in goat milk without having a negative impact on milk yield or its gross composition. Doses of 200 g/d per head are one of the most common feeding strategies to improve the FA profile of small ruminants without changing milk production traits [13,25,26,27,28]. (Table 1). The level of PUFA-n3 reached by linseed supplementation in our experiment (+144%) was higher than those obtained previously (+120%) [25] by using the extruded linseed, which provided the half dose of fat (32 g/d per animal) and C18:3n-3 (17 g/d per animal). However, the extent of enrichment is markedly lower than that observed in goats supplemented with 70 g/d of free linseed oil (+350) [29,30]. The increase in PUFA is usually more pronounced by free oil than by oilseeds, as the free form disturbs rumen metabolism by inhibiting the biohydrogenation of PUFA, thus increasing their transfer to milk. Moreover, the response in terms of improving the acid profile in goat milk is strongly influenced by the different feeding systems used on different farms. The C18:3n3 plays an important role as a precursor for long-chain fatty acid synthesis, such as EPA, DPA, and DHA, which occurs through several elongation and desaturation processes [31]. The C18:3n3, like other PUFAs, evidenced strong antimicrobial activity against several microorganisms, especially pathogens [32], and inhibited an essential component of bacterial fatty acid synthesis [33]. In fact, PUFAs have been used to control bacterial infections [16] and promote bacterial killing [17,18]. Although there are several reports regarding the antimicrobial activity of PUFAs, their activity in probiotic microorganisms is still under evaluation. In fact, consumption of n-3 PUFA and CLA has been reported to promote desirable changes in the intestinal microbiota of obese humans [19], demonstrating the selective activity of PUFA on bacterial vitality.
The nutritional quality of fermented milk obtained by LIN raw milk has also been enhanced by the enrichment in CLA cis9, trans11, and C18:1t11 acid compared to milk from goats belonging to the CON group. This FA is found mainly in ruminant products, which represent the main source of CLA in the human diet. The C18:1t11 is also the precursor of CLA cis9, trans11 in animals and human tissues due to the delta9 desaturase enzyme that catalyzes the addition of a cis-9 double bond on the former FA [34]. Studies in human and animal models have evidenced the extensive health promoting effects of CLA cis9, trans11. Interestingly, the use of dairy products naturally rich in CLA has been reported to reduce cholesterol content in the blood of humans [35,36] and some markers of inflammation [37,38,39]. Hypolipidemic effects in animal models have also been associated with C18:1t11 ingestion [40,41,42,43,44].
For adults, the recommended intake of PUFA ranges between 6 and 11% of the total daily energy intake. An intake of about 3 g/d of n-3 PUFA is recommended for the prevention of some chronic diseases [45]. Additionally, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) [46] recommended a daily intake of C18:2n6 of 14–17 g/d for men and 11–12 g/d for women. The same institute suggested a C18:3n3 daily intake of 1.6 g/d and 1.1 g/d for men and women, respectively. Since the concentration of fat in milk from LIN was 3.83 g/100 g and the concentration of C18:3n3 was 1.06 g/100 g of FAME, 100 g of this product could provide 0.04 g of this FA, corresponding to about 2.5% and 3.6% of the recommended daily intake for men and women, respectively.
Nutritional indices highlighted the better quality of milk from LIN than from CON. AI and TI indices describe the atherogenic and thrombogenic potential effects of fatty acids, and, therefore, lower values are beneficial for human health. Regarding the h/H index, which assesses the risk of cardiovascular diseases and the effect of FA on cholesterol, the highest values are desirable [47]. Milk from animals fed LIN showed lower values of AI and TI indices, and a larger h/H index compared to CON.
The presence of both PUFA and beneficial microorganisms in dairy products could exert a synergic mechanism on human health and, in particular, on the gut mucosal cells [48]. Thus, the anti-inflammatory actions of PUFA could enhance the beneficial effects of the probiotics. In this context, the use of bacteria that convert C18:2n6 to CLA [49,50] represents one of the most promising strategies in the production of fermented milks. Even if some bacteria have been reported to produce CLA effectively, the range of C18:2n6 conversion rates varied widely among strains [51]; moreover, LABs have been reported to be less efficient in producing CLA compared to bifidobacteria [51]. However, this strategy could not be immediately applicable due to the low CLA production and high fermentation costs. To date, inoculation of milk with lactobacilli has not had a substantial effect on the CLA content of fermented milk products [52], whereas modifying animal diets by including feed rich in C18:3n3 has been found to be a faster and cheaper approach.
This research demonstrated that goat milk rich in PUFA did not have negative effects on the viability of the considered Lactobacilli. Both values of L. Shirota and L. rhamnosus “live cells” throughout the shelf life of the products were higher than those recommended by the legislation in many countries [53] to guarantee the quality of fermented milk products and make them beneficial to the health of the consumers. These results were in contrast with other studies in which high concentrations of PUFA inhibited the growth of some lactobacilli, such as L. Shirota and L. bulgaricus [54]. Lv et al. [55] reported a negative effect of C18:2n6 in a simulated gut environment on the growth of L. rhamnosus LGG. While in the present study, the C18:2n6 was natively present in milk, in the other studies it was directly added to the milk. The combined effect of Omega-3 and L. plantarum on the viability and apoptosis gene expression of cancer cells has been recently tested [22] in fermented milk.
In this research, L. Shirota and L. rhamnosus strains were able to grow during the fermentation time despite slow acidification. Indeed, to guarantee the safety of the milk as well as its appropriate technological characteristics, the pH should be 3.8–4.5 during the acidification process. Although L. paracasei FS109 was found to be able to perform good acidification of goat milk with a different alpha-s1 casein genotype [1], in this study it was not suitable for the production of fermented milk. It is possible that some technological parameters (e.g., incubation temperature) adopted during the experiment, as well as the specificity of the substrate, did not allow prompt adaptation of the bacteria strain.
In the fermented milk process, the poor acidifying activity of probiotic bacteria compared with common yogurt starter has been previously documented [56,57]. The exchange of metabolites and growth factors probably has several advantages in mixed culture compared with single strain fermentation. It has also been reported that in milk enriched with certain amino acids, the fermentation time due to L. rhamnosus is shortened [58].
Moreover, it is important to point out that lactobacilli survived during the entire cold storage period when intense post-acidification occurred; this was more pronounced in CON than in LIN milk. Post-acidification is a process that occurs due to a decrease in acidity during cold storage and can negatively affect bacteria viability [59,60]. In this work, L. Shirota showed good tolerance to the acidic environment during the entire storage period. This is not a surprising result, as the L. Shirota strain is one of the most studied probiotic microorganisms, and its ability to tolerate acidic environments has been well documented [61,62].
With regard to Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus, many strains belonging to this species isolated from milk and dairy products have shown the necessary characteristics to be defined as probiotics [63,64]. Resistance to the acid environment of the L. rhamnosus strain isolated from traditional cheese and, potentially, probiotics during 45 days of fermented milk storage was reported [65].
In conclusion, this study showed that milk naturally rich in PUFA n3 from goat feed linseed is a raw material suitable to produce fermented milk containing a high number of beneficial lactobacilli. Furthermore, the high number of lactic acid bacteria and the low pH remain the main parameters to be taken into account in the development of high-quality fermented milk. Of course, sensory analysis will have to be carried out to assess consumer acceptance of this potential novel food.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.N. and N.P.M.; methodology, N.P.M. and A.N.; formal analysis, N.P.M., M.A.M. and S.C.; investigation, S.C. and M.A.M.; resources, A.N. and N.P.M.; data curation, L.M.; writing—original draft preparation, N.P.M., A.N. and S.C.; writing—review and editing, S.C.; funding acquisition, A.N. and L.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the University of Sassari, grant “FAR2020-Fondo di Ateneo per la Ricerca 2020”.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Sassari (no. 87140/2020).

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data are available under reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Mangia, N.P.; Saliba, L.; Zoumpopoulou, G.; Chessa, S.; Anastasiou, R.; Karayiannis, Ι.; Sgouras, D.; Tsakalidou, E.; Nudda, A. Goat milk with different alpha-s1 casein genotype (CSN1S1) fermented by selected lactobacillus paracasei as potential functional food. Fermentation 2019, 5, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Hill, C.; Guarner, F.; Reid, G.; Gibson, G.R.; Merenstein, D.J.; Pot, B.; Morelli, L.; Canani, R.B.; Flint, H.J.; Salminen, S.; et al. Expert consensus document: The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics consensus statement on the scope and appropriate use of the term probiotic. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2014, 11, 506–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Barrons, R.; Tassone, D. Use of Lactobacillus probiotics for bacterial genitourinary infections in women: A review. Clin. Ther. 2008, 30, 453–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Rafter, J.; Bennett, M.; Caderni, G.; Clune, Y.; Hughes, R.; Karlsson, P.C.; Klinder, A.; O’Riordan, M.; O’Sullivan, G.C.; Pool-Zobel, B.; et al. Dietary synbiotics reduce cancer risk factors in polypectomized and colon cancer patients. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2007, 85, 488–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Boyle, R.J.; Tang, M.L.K. The role of probiotics in the management of allergic disease. Clin. Exp. Allergy 2006, 36, 568–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Stavropoulou, E.; Bezirtzoglou, E. Probiotics in medicine: A long debate. Front. Immunol. 2020, 11, 2192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Lopez, P.M.; Ortega, R.M. Omega-3 fatty acids in the prevention and control of cardiovascular disease. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2003, 57, S22–S25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. La Rovere, M.T.; Christensen, J.H. The autonomic nervous system and cardiovascular disease: Role of n-3 PUFAs. Vascul. Pharmacol. 2015, 71, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Mcguire, M.A.; Mcguire, M.K. Conjugated linoleic acid (CLA): A ruminant fatty acid with beneficial effects on human health. J. Anim. Sci. 2000, 77, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Whigham, L.D.; Cook, M.E.; Atkinson, R.L. Conjugated linoleic acid: Implications for human health. Pharmacol. Res. 2000, 42, 503–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Nudda, A.; Battacone, G.; Boaventura Neto, O.; Cannas, A.; Francesconi, A.H.D.; Atzori, A.S.; Pulina, G. Feeding strategies to design the fatty acid profile of sheep milk and cheese. Rev. Bras. Zootec. 2014, 43, 445–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Nudda, A.; Cannas, A.; Correddu, F.; Atzori, A.S.; Lunesu, M.F.; Battacone, G.; Pulina, G. Sheep and goats respond differently to feeding strategies directed to improve the fatty acid profile of milk fat. Animals 2020, 10, 1290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Correddu, F.; Gaspa, G.; Pulina, G.; Nudda, A. Grape seed and linseed, alone and in combination, enhance unsaturated fatty acids in the milk of Sarda dairy sheep. J. Dairy Sci. 2016, 99, 1725–1735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Nudda, A.; Correddu, F.; Marzano, A.; Battacone, G.; Nicolussi, P.; Bonelli, P.; Pulina, G. Effects of diets containing grape seed, linseed, or both on milk production traits, liver and kidney activities, and immunity of lactating dairy ewes. J. Dairy Sci. 2015, 98, 1157–1166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Chilliard, Y.; Ferlay, A. Dietary lipids and forages interactions on cow and goat milk fatty acid composition and sensory properties. Reprod. Nutr. Dev. 2004, 44, 467–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Nienaber, A.; Ozturk, M.; Dolman, R.; Blaauw, R.; Zandberg, L.L.; van Rensburg, S.; Britz, M.; Hayford, F.E.A.; Brombacher, F.; Loots, D.T.; et al. n-3 long-chain PUFA promote antibacterial and inflammation-resolving effects in Mycobacterium tuberculosis-infected C3HeB/FeJ mice, dependent on fatty acid status. Br. J. Nutr. 2022, 127, 384–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Serhan, C.N.; Chiang, N.; Dalli, J. New pro-resolving n-3 mediators bridge resolution of infectious inflammation to tissue regeneration. Mol. Aspects Med. 2017, 64, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Chiang, N.; Fredman, G.; Bäckhed, F.; Oh, S.F.; Vickery, T.; Schmidt, B.A.; Serhan, C.N. Infection regulates pro-resolving mediators that lower antibiotic requirements. Nature 2012, 484, 524–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Coelho, O.G.L.; Cândido, F.G.; Alfenas, R.C.G. Dietary fat and gut microbiota: Mechanisms involved in obesity control. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2019, 59, 3045–3053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Kobyliak, N.; Falalyeyeva, T.; Bodnar, P.; Beregova, T. Probiotics Supplemented with Omega-3 Fatty Acids are More Effective for Hepatic Steatosis Reduction in an Animal Model of Obesity. Probiot. Antimicrob. Proteins 2017, 9, 123–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Kobyliak, N.; Abenavoli, L.; Falalyeyeva, T.; Mykhalchyshyn, G.; Boccuto, L.; Kononenko, L.; Kyriienko, D.; Komisarenko, I.; Dynnyk, O. Beneficial effects of probiotic combination with omega-3 fatty acids in NAFLD: A randomized clinical study. Minerva Med. 2018, 109, 418–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Sharifi, E.; Yazdani, Z.; Najafi, M.; Hosseini-Khah, Z.; Jafarpour, A.; Rafiei, A. The combined effect of fish oil containing Omega-3 fatty acids and Lactobacillus plantarum on colorectal cancer. Food Sci. Nutr. 2022, 10, 4411–4418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Saliba, L.; Zoumpopoulou, G.; Anastasiou, R.; Hassoun, G.; Karayiannis, Y.; Sgouras, D.; Tsakalidou, E.; Deiana, P.; Montanari, L.; Mangia, N.P. Probiotic and safety assessment of Lactobacillus strains isolated from Lebanese Baladi goat milk. Int. Dairy J. 2021, 120, 105092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Mangia, N.P.; Saliba, L.; Deiana, P. Functional and safety characterization of autochthonous Lactobacillus paracasei FS103 isolated from sheep cheese and its survival in sheep and cow fermented milks during cold storage. Ann. Microbiol. 2019, 69, 161–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Nudda, A.; Battacone, G.; Usai, M.G.; Fancellu, S.; Pulina, G. Supplementation with extruded linseed cake affects concentrations of conjugated linoleic acid and vaccenic acid in goat milk. J. Dairy Sci. 2006, 89, 277–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zhang, R.H.; Mustafa, A.F.; Zhao, X. Effects of feeding oilseeds rich in linoleic and linolenic fatty acids to lactating ewes on cheese yield and on fatty acid composition of milk and cheese. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2006, 127, 220–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Mele, M.; Contarini, G.; Cercaci, L.; Serra, A.; Buccioni, A.; Povolo, M.; Conte, G.; Funaro, A.; Banni, S.; Lercker, G.; et al. Enrichment of Pecorino cheese with conjugated linoleic acid by feeding dairy ewes with extruded linseed: Effect on fatty acid and triglycerides composition and on oxidative stability. Int. Dairy J. 2011, 21, 365–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Serra, A.; Conte, G.; Ciucci, F.; Bulleri, E.; Corrales-Retana, L.; Cappucci, A.; Buccioni, A.; Mele, M. Dietary linseed supplementation affects the fatty acid composition of the sn-2 position of triglycerides in sheep milk. J. Dairy Sci. 2018, 101, 6742–6751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Chilliard, Y.; Ferlay, A.; Rouel, J.; Lamberet, G. A review of nutritional and physiological factors affecting goat milk lipid synthesis and lipolysis. J. Dairy Sci. 2003, 86, 1751–1770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Marín, A.M.; Gómez-Cortés, P.; Castro, G.G.; Juárez, M.; Alba, L.P.; Hernández, M.P.; De la Fuente, M.A. Effects of feeding increasing dietary levels of high oleic or regular sunflower or linseed oil on fatty acid profile of goat milk. J. Dairy Sci. 2012, 95, 1942–1955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Barceló-Coblijn, G.; Murphy, E.J. Alpha-linolenic acid and its conversion to longer chain n-3 fatty acids: Benefits for human health and a role in maintaining tissue n-3 fatty acid levels. Prog. Lipid Res. 2009, 48, 355–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Lee, J.Y.; Kim, Y.S.; Shin, D.H. Antimicrobial synergistic effect of linolenic acid and monoglyceride against Bacillus cereus and Staphylococcus aureus. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002, 50, 2193–2199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Zheng, C.J.; Yoo, J.S.; Lee, T.G.; Cho, H.Y.; Kim, Y.H.; Kim, W.G. Fatty acid synthesis is a target for antibacterial activity of unsaturated fatty acids. FEMS Lett. 2005, 579, 5157–5162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Palmquist, D.L.; Lock, A.L.; Shingfield, K.J.; Bauman, D.E. Biosynthesis of conjugated linoleic acid in ruminants and humans. Adv. Food Nutr. 2005, 50, 179–217. [Google Scholar]
  35. Pintus, S.; Murru, E.; Carta, G.; Cordeddu, L.; Batetta, B.; Accossu, S.; Pistis, D.; Uda, S.; Ghiani, M.E.; Mele, M.; et al. Sheep cheese naturally enriched in α-linolenic, conjugated linoleic and vaccenic acids improves the lipid profile and reduces anandamide in the plasma of hypercholesterolaemic subjects. Br. J. Nutr. 2013, 109, 1453–1462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Derakhshande-Rishehri, S.M.; Mansourian, M.; Kelishadi, R.; Heidari-Beni, M. Association of foods enriched in conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) and CLA supplements with lipid profile in human studies: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Public Health Nutr. 2015, 18, 2041–2054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Penedo, L.A.; Nunes, J.C.; Gama, M.A.S.; Leite, P.E.C.; Quirico-Santos, T.F.; Torres, A.G. Intake of butter naturally enriched with cis9, trans11 conjugated linoleic acid reduces systemic inflammatory mediators in healthy young adults. J. Nutr. Biochem. 2013, 24, 2144–2151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Sofi, F.; Buccioni, A.; Cesari, F.; Gori, A.M.; Minieri, S.; Mannini, L.; Casini, A.; Gensini, G.F.; Abbate, R.; Antongiovanni, M. Effects of a dairy product (pecorino cheese) naturally rich in cis-9, trans-11 conjugated linoleic acid on lipid, inflammatory and haemorheological variables: A dietary intervention study. Nutr. Metab. Cardiovasc. Dis. 2010, 20, 117–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Da Silva, M.S.; Bilodeau, J.F.; Larose, J.; Greffard, K.; Julien, P.; Barbier, O.; Rudkowska, I. Modulation of the biomarkers of inflammation and oxidative stress by ruminant trans fatty acids and dairy proteins in vascular endothelial cells (HUVEC). Prostaglandins Leukot. Essent. Fat. Acids 2017, 126, 64–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Lock, A.L.; Horne, C.A.; Bauman, D.E.; Salter, A.M. Butter naturally enriched in conjugated linoleic acid and vaccenic acid alters tissue fatty acids and improves the plasma lipoprotein profile in cholesterol-fed hamsters. J. Nutr. 2005, 135, 1934–1939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Bauchart, D.; Roy, A.; Lorenz, S.; Chardigny, J.M.; Ferlay, A.; Gruffat, D.; Sébédio, J.L.; Chilliard, Y.; Durand, D. Butters varying in trans 18:1 and cis-9, trans-11 conjugated linoleic acid modify plasma lipoproteins in the hypercholesterolemic rabbit. Lipids 2007, 42, 123–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Bassett, C.M.C.; Edel, A.L.; Patenaude, A.F.; McCullough, R.S.; Blackwood, D.P.; Chouinard, P.Y.; Paquin, P.; Lamarche, B.T.; Pierce, G.N. Dietary vaccenic acid has antiatherogenic effects in LDLr−/− mice. J. Nutr. 2010, 140, 18–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Jacome-Sosa, M.M.; Borthwick, F.; Mangat, R.; Uwiera, R.; Reaney, M.J.; Shen, J.; Quiroga, A.D.; Jacobs, R.L.; Lehner, R.; Proctor, S.D. Diets enriched in trans-11 vaccenic acid alleviate ectopic lipid accumulation in a rat model of NAFLD and metabolic syndrome. J. Nutr. Biochem. 2014, 25, 692–701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Wang, Y.; Jacome-Sosa, M.M.; Ruth, M.R.; Goruk, S.D.; Reaney, M.J.; Glimm, D.R.; Wright, D.C.; Vine, D.F.; Field, C.J.; Proctor, S.D. Trans-11 vaccenic acid reduces hepatic lipogenesis and chylomicron secretion in JCR:LA-cp rats. J. Nutr. 2009, 11, 2049–2054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization). Fats and Fatty Acids in Human Nutrition. In Report of an Expert Consultation; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 2010; pp. 1–166. [Google Scholar]
  46. Trumbo, P.; Schlicker, S.; Yates, A.A.; Poos, M. Dietary reference intakes for energy, carbohydrate, fiber, fat, fatty acids, cholesterol, protein and amino acids. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 2002, 102, 1621–1631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Kasapidou, E.; Basdagianni, Z.; Papadopoulos, V.; Karaiskou, C.; Kesidis, A.; Tsiotsias, A. Effects of intensive and semi-intensive production on sheep milk chemical composition, physicochemical characteristics, fatty acid profile, and nutritional indices. Animals 2021, 11, 2578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Das, U.N. Essential fatty acids as possible enhancers of the beneficial actions of probiotics. Nutrition 2002, 18, 786–789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Yang, B.; Gao, H.; Stanton, C.; Ross, R.P.; Zhang, H.; Chen, Y.Q.; Chen, H.; Chen, W. Bacterial conjugated linoleic acid production and their applications. Prog. Lipid Res. 2017, 68, 26–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Mei, Y.; Chen, H.; Yang, B.; Zhao, J.; Zhang, H.; Chen, W. Research progress on conjugated linoleic acid bio-conversion in Bifidobacterium. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2022, 369, 109593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Terán, V.; Pizarro, P.L.; Zacarías, M.F.; Vinderola, G.; Medina, R.; Van Nieuwenhove, C. Production of conjugated dienoic and trienoic fatty acids by lactic acid bacteria and ifidobacterial. J. Funct. Foods 2015, 19, 417–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Xu, S.; Boylston, T.D.; Glatz, B.A. Effect of inoculation level of Lactobacillus rhamnosus and yogurt cultures on conjugated linoleic acid content and quality attributes of fermented milk products. J. Food Sci. 2006, 71, C275–C280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Mukherjee, A.; Gómez-Sala, B.; O’Connor, E.M.; Kenny, J.G.; Cotter, P.D. Global Regulatory Frameworks for Fermented Foods: A Review. Front. Nutr. 2022, 9, 902642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Kankaanpää, P.E.; Salminen, S.J.; Isolauri, E.; Lee, Y.K. The influence of polyunsaturated fatty acids on probiotic growth and adhesion. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2001, 194, 149–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Lv, H.; Ren, D.; Yan, W.; Wang, Y.; Liu, H.; Shen, M. Linoleic acid inhibits Lactobacillus activity by destroying cell membrane and affecting normal metabolism. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2020, 100, 2057–2064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Donkor, O.N.; Nilmini, S.L.I.; Stolic, P.; Vasiljevic, T.; Shah, N.P. Survival and activity of selected probiotic organisms in set-type yogurt during cold storage. Int. Dairy J. 2007, 17, 657–665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Damin, M.R.; Minowa, E.; Alcantara, M.R.; Oliveira, M.N. Effect of cold storage on culture viability and some rheological properties of fermented milk prepared with yogurt and probiotic bacteria. J. Texture Stud. 2008, 39, 4055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Sun, J.; Chen, H.; Qiao, Y.; Liu, G.; Leng, C.; Zhang, Y.; Lv, X.; Feng, Z. The nutrient requirements of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and their application to fermented milk. J. Dairy Sci. 2019, 102, 5971–5978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Guan, C.; Chen, X.; Zhao, R.; Yuan, Y.; Huang, X.; Su, J.; Ding, X.; Chen, X.; Huang, Y.; Gu, R. A weak post-acidification Lactobacillus helveticus UV mutant with improved textural properties. Food Sci. Nutr. 2021, 9, 469–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Deshwal, G.K.; Tiwari, S.; Kumar, A.; Raman, R.K.; Kadyan, S. Review on factors affecting and control of post-acidification in yoghurt and related products. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 109, 499–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Otaka, M.; Kikuchi-Hayakawa, H.; Ogura, J.; Ishikawa, H.; Yomogida, Y.; Ota, M.; Hidese, S.; Ishida, I.; Aida, M.; Matsuda, K.; et al. Effect of Lacticaseibacillus paracasei Strain Shirota on improvement in depressive symptoms, and its association with abundance of actinobacteria in gut microbiota. Microorganisms 2021, 10, 1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Shoaei, F. Food Health with Increased Probiotic Survival During Storage. In Prebiotics and Probiotics—From Food to Health, 1st ed.; ItechOpen: London, UK, 2022; pp. 151–172. [Google Scholar]
  63. Dos Santos, K.M.O.; Vieira, A.D.S.; Buriti, F.C.A.; Frutuoso do Nascimento, J.C.; Silva de Melo, M.E.; Bruno, L.M.; de Fátima Borges, M.; Costa Rocha, C.R.; de Souza Lopes, A.C.; Gombossy de Melo Franco, B.D.; et al. Artisanal Coalho cheeses as source of beneficial Lactobacillus plantarum and Lactobacillus rhamnosus strains. Dairy Sci. Technol. 2015, 95, 209–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Valente, G.L.C.; Acurcio, L.B.; Freitas, L.P.V.; Nicoli, J.R.; Silva, A.M.; Souza, M.R.; Penna, C.F.A.M. Short communication: In Vitro and in vivo probiotic potential of Lactobacillus plantarum B7 and Lactobacillus rhamnosus D1 isolated from Minas artisanal cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 2019, 102, 5957–5961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Mendes, D.P.G.; Souza, M.R.; Galletti Júnior, M.; Leite, M.O.; Penna, C.F.A.M. Quality of fermented milks produced with Lactobacillus rhamnosus and Lactobacillus fermentum isolated from artisanal cheeses. Arq. Bras. Med. Vet. Zootec. 2014, 66, 1291–1295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Fermentation 09 00522 g001 550
Figure 1. Viable count (Log CFU/mL) of L. paracasei Shirota in fermented milk from goats fed control diet (CON) and goats fed 200 g/d of extruded linseed (LIN).
Figure 1. Viable count (Log CFU/mL) of L. paracasei Shirota in fermented milk from goats fed control diet (CON) and goats fed 200 g/d of extruded linseed (LIN).
Fermentation 09 00522 g001
Fermentation 09 00522 g002 550
Figure 2. Viable count (Log CFU/mL) of L. rhamnosus A2 in fermented milk from goats fed control diet (CON) and goats fed 200 g/d of extruded linseed (LIN).
Figure 2. Viable count (Log CFU/mL) of L. rhamnosus A2 in fermented milk from goats fed control diet (CON) and goats fed 200 g/d of extruded linseed (LIN).
Fermentation 09 00522 g002
Fermentation 09 00522 g003 550
Figure 3. Viable count (Log CFU/mL) of L. paracasei FS109 (c) in fermented milk from goats fed control diet (CON) and goats fed 200 g/d of extruded linseed (LIN).
Figure 3. Viable count (Log CFU/mL) of L. paracasei FS109 (c) in fermented milk from goats fed control diet (CON) and goats fed 200 g/d of extruded linseed (LIN).
Fermentation 09 00522 g003
Fermentation 09 00522 g004 550
Figure 4. pH and lactic acid (L.a.) of L. paracasei Shirota in fermented milk from goats fed control diet (CON) and goats fed 200 g/d of extruded linseed (LIN).
Figure 4. pH and lactic acid (L.a.) of L. paracasei Shirota in fermented milk from goats fed control diet (CON) and goats fed 200 g/d of extruded linseed (LIN).
Fermentation 09 00522 g004
Fermentation 09 00522 g005 550
Figure 5. pH and lactic acid (L.a.) of L. rhamnosus A2 in fermented milk from goats fed control diet (CON) and goats fed 200 g/d of extruded linseed (LIN).
Figure 5. pH and lactic acid (L.a.) of L. rhamnosus A2 in fermented milk from goats fed control diet (CON) and goats fed 200 g/d of extruded linseed (LIN).
Fermentation 09 00522 g005
Fermentation 09 00522 g006 550
Figure 6. pH and lactic acid (L.a.) of L. paracasei FS109 in fermented milk from goats fed control diet (CON) and goats fed 200 g/d of extruded linseed (LIN).
Figure 6. pH and lactic acid (L.a.) of L. paracasei FS109 in fermented milk from goats fed control diet (CON) and goats fed 200 g/d of extruded linseed (LIN).
Fermentation 09 00522 g006
Table
Table 1. Milk yield and composition of goat fed control diet (CON) and goats fed 200 g/d of extruded linseed (LIN).
Table 1. Milk yield and composition of goat fed control diet (CON) and goats fed 200 g/d of extruded linseed (LIN).
Items CONLINSEM 1p Value
Milk Yield, g/d853.33788.0067.860.644
Fat, %3.653.830.180.638
Protein, %2.873.040.120.483
Lactose, %4.484.380.050.365
SCC 2, cell/μL1847.113498.7580.160.161
Fatty acids, g/100 g of FAME
C4:0 1.191.160.040.715
C6:0 1.421.300.070.411
C8:01.741.600.120.575
C10:06.675.580.490.275
C11:00.040.040.010.840
C12:03.062.760.250.567
C13:00.060.060.000.639
C14:0 10.738.460.440.006
C14:10.180.110.010.032
C15:00.760.720.020.361
C15:1 cis-100.160.160.010.995
C16:0 33.3523.631.46<0.001
C16:10.770.540.040.001
C17:00.630.560.020.093
C17:1 cis-100.290.240.010.035
C18:0 8.7113.430.860.003
C18:1 trans-6,80.170.360.03<0.001
C18:1 trans-90.220.340.02<0.001
C18:1 trans-100.240.320.020.033
C18:1 trans-11 0.872.150.20<0.001
C18:1 cis-9 22.9627.821.030.013
C18:1 cis-110.530.730.03<0.001
C18:1 cis-120.180.300.02<0.001
C18:1 cis-130.020.050.00<0.001
C18:1 cis-140.070.090.000.008
C18:2 trans-9,120.270.670.05<0.001
C18:1 cis-150.290.640.05<0.001
C18:2n-6 2.312.660.080.028
C18:3n-60.100.090.010.408
C18:3n-3 0.361.060.09<0.001
CLA cis-9, trans-110.701.400.120.002
C20:00.250.250.010.816
CLA trans-10, cis-1200.010.000.003
C20:1 cis-110.070.100.000.001
C20:3, cis-8, 110.070.060.000.008
C20:40.200.160.010.070
C22:00.070.060.000.262
C22:10.010.010.000.650
C20:5n-30.060.080.000.026
C22:40.020.020.000.648
C22:60.050.050.000.730
Groups of fatty acids 3
SFA67.2558.21.500.001
UFA31.3040.391.500.001
PUFA5.757.600.27<0.001
PUFA n-30.501.220.09<0.001
PUFA n-62.692.990.080.069
n6/n-35.382.450.39<0.001
Total CLA1.031.750.130.002
Nutritional indices 4
AI2.651.560.180.001
TI2.791.470.20<0.001
h/H0.621.050.070.001
1 SEM = standard error of the mean. 2 SCC = Somatic cells count. 3 Groups of fatty acids: SFA = sum of the individual saturated fatty acids; UFA = sum of the individual unsaturated fatty acids; PUFA = sum of the individual polyunsaturated fatty acids; PUFA n-3 and PUFA n-6 = sum of individual n-3 and n-6 fatty acids, respectively; total CLA = sum of individual conjugated linoleic acids. 4 Nutritional indices: TI = thrombogenic index; AI = atherogenic index; h/H = hypocholesterolemic to hypercholesterolemic ratio.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mangia, N.P.; Carta, S.; Murgia, M.A.; Montanari, L.; Nudda, A. Fermented Milk Produced with Goat Milk Enriched with PUFA Omega-3 by Supplementation of Diet with Extruded Linseed. Fermentation 2023, 9, 522. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation9060522

AMA Style

Mangia NP, Carta S, Murgia MA, Montanari L, Nudda A. Fermented Milk Produced with Goat Milk Enriched with PUFA Omega-3 by Supplementation of Diet with Extruded Linseed. Fermentation. 2023; 9(6):522. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation9060522

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mangia, Nicoletta P., Silvia Carta, Marco A. Murgia, Luigi Montanari, and Anna Nudda. 2023. "Fermented Milk Produced with Goat Milk Enriched with PUFA Omega-3 by Supplementation of Diet with Extruded Linseed" Fermentation 9, no. 6: 522. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation9060522

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop