18 BULLETIN 661, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
Table 1. — Effect of fat content of buttermilk on strength of casein. 
Buttermilk 
Times 
curd 
Acidity 
of drain 
Drying 
tempera- 
Fat in 
butter- 
Casein 
required. 
Lot No. 
Portion 
No. 
Acidity. 
washed. 
water. 
ture. 
milk. 
Per cent. 
Per cent. 
°F. 
Per cent. 
Grams. 
56.17 
17A 
0.95 
4 
0.035 
130 
1.2 
12 
56.17 
17B 
1.00 
3 
.20 
130 
.07 
10 
56.30 
30A 
.85 
4 
.015 
130 
.02 
9 
56.30 
30B 
.88 
4 
.015 
130 
.30 
10 
56.53 
53D 
.67 
4 
.09 
125 
.05 
9 
56.53 
53D 
.70 
4 
.07 
125 
.50 
10 
56.53 
53 A 
.67 
4 
.10 
165 
.05 
9 
56.53 
53C 
.70 
4 
.06 
165 
.50 
11 
56.55 
55A 
.82 
4 
.02 
125 
.07 
8 
56.55 . 
55C 
.82 
4 
.01 
125 
.32 
9+ 
56.55 
55B 
.83 
4 
.02 
160 
.07 
8 
56.55 
55D 
.83 
4 
.01 
160 
.32 
9 
56.58 
58A 
.87 
4 
.02 
125 
.06 
9 
56.58 
58B 
.86 
4 
.02 
125 
.27 
9 
56.62 
62A 
.80 
4 
.015 
125 
.04 
7 
56.62 
62B 
.80 
4 
.02 
125 
.35 
8 
56.64 
56.64 
64A 
64B 
4 
4 
.03 
.03 
125 
125 
.11 
.28 
7+ 
7 
56.64 
56.64 
64C 
64D 
4 
4 
.04 
.03 
160 
160 
.11 
.28 
8 
8 
56.71 
56.71 
71A 
71C 
4 
4 
.06 
.07 
125 
125 
.08 
.30 
8+ 
9 
56.71 
71B 
4 
.10 
175 
.08 
8 
56.71 
56.72 
7LD 
72A 
4 
4 
.07 
.04 
175 
125 
.30 
.08 
9 
56.72 
56.73 
72C 
73A 
4 
4 
.05 
.02 
125 
125 
.30 
.20 
8+ 
8+ 
56.73 
56.73 
56.73 
56.74 
56.74 
56.84 
56.84 
56.84 
56.84 
73C 
73B 
73D 
74A 
74C 
84A 
84C 
84B 
84D 
4 
4 
4 
4 
4 




.00 
.02 
.01 
.01 
.02 
.46 
.38 
.37 
.40 
125 
168 
168 
125 
125 
126 
126 
162 
162 
.80 
.20 
.80 
.2 
.8 
.17 
.50 
.17 
.50 
9+ 
9 
10 
7+ 
9- 
8 
10 
8 
10+ 
56.87 
56.87 
56.87 
56.87 
87A 
87C 
87B 
87D 
3 
3 


.05 
.03 
.48 
.41 
126 
126 
126 
126 
.28 
:s3 
.28 
. 75 
8- 
9— 
8+ 
9 
Table 1 shows the comparative strength of different lots in terms 
of grams of casein required to hold the coating mixture properly. 
If it is assumed that the difference in strength is caused entirely by 
the extra fat content we find that in lot 56.17 the low-fat butter- 
milk casein was 20 per cent stronger than the higher-fat buttermilk, 
while in lot 56.30 the difference in strength in favor of the low-fat 
buttermilk casein was 11 per cent. The greater strength shown by 
the low-fat buttermilk casein in practically all instances is more 
significant when it is considered that the high-fat buttermilk casein 
showed decreased strength together with poorer handling qualities. 
The increased quantity of fat has a detrimental effect upon the 
physical working qualities of the dissolved casein, producing a thin, 
weak-bodied solution of greatly reduced viscosity which upon cooling 
has a tendency to become a greasy mixture of poor spreading qualities. 
Having in view trying out the effect of increased fat content with a 
high drying temperature as compared with a low temperature, lots 
