ARTICLE IN PRESS

International Dairy Journal 18 (2008) 754– 758

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Dairy Journal

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/idairyj

Review

65 Years of ice cream science

H. Douglas Goff 
Department of Food Science, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada N1G 2W1

a b s t r a c t

Developments in ice cream science over the period from 1941 to 2006 are reviewed with a focus on
three aspects of structure and ingredient functionality where significant advances have been made
based on developments in the underlying sciences: fat structure and emulsifier functionality; protein
functionality; and ice recrystallization and stabilizer functionality. North American production and
consumption data over the same 65-year period are presented. Finally, developments in ice cream
manufacturing techniques during these 65 years are briefly described.
& 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 754
2. Production and consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 754
3. Ingredients and structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 755
3.1. Fat—partial coalescence and emulsifier functionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 755
3.2. Proteins—functionality and the development of whey-derived ingredients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 756
3.3. Ice—formation, recrystallization and stabilizer functionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 756
4. Manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 757
5. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 757
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 757

1. Introduction references that highlight significant milestone advances between

As part of the symposium ‘‘Milestone Achievements in Dairy
Science’’, a tribute to the career of Professor Paul Jelen, I will
attempt to review progress in the area of ice cream science over
the last 65 years. It is not exhaustive, rather I have chosen to first
introduce the changes that have occurred to the size of the ice
cream industry in North America over the years 1941–2006, then
to focus on three important areas of ice cream structure and
ingredient functionality where large gains in knowledge have
been made, based on a continuously improving understanding of
the underlying science, and finally to briefly discuss the
tremendous advances that have been made in ice cream
manufacturing equipment. Professor Hugo H. Sommer of the
University of Wisconsin wrote a classic edition of his textbook
‘Theory and Practice of Ice Cream Making’ in 1944, and that serves
as an ideal benchmark from which to gauge the state of the art in
ice cream science in 1941. I have chosen what I feel are key
 Tel.: +1 519 824 4120x53878; fax: +1 519 824 6631.
E-mail address: dgoff@uoguelph.ca
then and now in each of these areas, recognizing that, of necessity,
I have left out many other significant references and authors. I
would direct the reader to several other thorough reviews of the
topics discussed below, for further references and more detail:
basic ice cream science (Marshall, Goff, & Hartel, 2003); historical
aspects (Goff, 2004); fat structure and emulsifier functionality
(Goff, 1997, 2002, 2006); protein functionality (Goff, 2003); ice
recrystallization and stabilizer functionality (Adapa, Schmidt,
Jeon, Herald, & Flores, 2000; Goff & Hartel, 2004; Hartel, 1998).
2. Production and consumption
In the United States in 2004, 6056 million litres of regular, light
and low-fat ice cream were manufactured. The US frozen dairy
desserts industry utilized 10% of total milk production and 16% of
manufactured milk production. Exports of ice cream from the
United States accounted for 41 million litres in 2004, worth $50
million (data from Economic Research Service, United States
Department of Agriculture). If we go back to 1941, the reported ice
cream production in the United States was 1477 million litres

0958-6946/$ - see front matter & 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.idairyj.2008.03.006
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
H.D. Goff / International Dairy Journal 18 (2008) 754–758
(Sommer, 1944), representing a 4-fold increase in 65 years. No
exports were reported. In Canada, frozen dairy dessert production
in 2004 was 330.2 million litres. Canada imported 0.55 million
litres and exported 5.8 million litres of ice cream in 2004 (data
from Statistics Canada). In 1941, Canadian ice cream production
was 64.5 million litres, representing a 5-fold increase in 65 years.
Again, no exports were reported. Consolidation can be readily
seen by looking at the number of plants producing hard ice cream
in the United States. In 2004 there were 400 registered
manufacturers, compared with the situation in 1941, when there
were 3090 commercial manufacturers of ice cream and an
additional 12,726 counter-top and small retailers reporting ice
cream production. Similar trends have occurred in Canada and in
Europe. Consolidation has allowed for modern improvements in
mechanization and automation as well as plant sanitation and
hygiene. Clearly, this industry has become a very large and
industrialized global business.
The total per capita consumption of all ice cream in the United
States in 2004 was 18.7 L. This has not changed in the last 25
years. In fact, it represents marginal growth over a 50-year period;
the per capita consumption in 1955 was 17.8 L. In 1941, it stood at
10.9 L. In Canada, per capita consumption in 2004 was 9.3 L of
hard and soft ice cream. This has declined from 12.7 L per capita in
1980, but still shows dramatic growth from 5.6 L in 1941. The
period from 1945 to 1955 saw rapid growth in per capita
consumption in both countries.
Within the ice cream category, there has not been the same
trend toward consumption of low-fat products as has been seen in
the consumption of fluid milk. On the contrary, the last 20 years
has seen the development of a range of premium (within the
approximate range of 12–4% fat) and super-premium (approxi-
mately 16% fat) products. Of today’s consumption of ice cream in
the US, 70% is standard product (410% fat), 28% is low fat and 2%
is non-fat. This is very similar to 1980, during which 73% of
consumption was regular, standard fat product and 27% was low
fat and non-fat.
3. Ingredients and structure
Research related to ingredients for frozen dessert products can
be pragmatic in nature, examining the effects of certain
ingredients on chemical or physical properties of ice cream, and/
or it can be focused on determining the specific functionality of
ingredients, particularly as they contribute to product micro-
structure. In the former category, many new ingredients are
available for use today, compared to 65 years ago, enabling, for
example, a much wider range of nutritional-based formulations
(e.g., sweeteners for no-sugar-added types of formulations) or cost
savings. Closer to ice cream science, much ingredient work has
focused on the contributions that ingredients or their components
make to microstructure and colloidal properties: understanding
and control of ice recrystallization, recognition of the importance
of the glass transition in stability of the frozen product,
development of stabilizers and the latest developments in the
area of ice structuring proteins from natural sources (the so-called
‘‘anti-freeze proteins’’), advances in understanding and control of
fat destabilization and emulsifier functionality, and enhanced
knowledge of the functionality of proteins at the air bubble
interface and air bubble stability. These studies have been
published in highly respected physical chemical journals and
reviews of this progress are available, indicating the advanced
level of knowledge that has been developed. A recent paper in
Current Opinion in Colloid and Interface Science reviewed
developments from 1999 to 2002 related to formation and
stabilization of structure in ice cream and related products
755
(Goff, 2002). There are 31 references specifically regarding
colloidal aspects of ice cream science published between 2000
and 2002 mentioned in that review. This gives some indication of
the rate of progress in the field of ice cream science. The progress
made in three specific topic areas will be discussed in detail
below.
3.1. Fat—partial coalescence and emulsifier functionality
The importance of the fat structure and colloidal aspects of ice
cream are widely recognized today, as fat structure is the
underlying explanation for dryness of ice cream at extrusion from
the barrel freezer, moldability, shape retention during meltdown,
and smooth-eating texture. With interest in low-fat products, it is
essential to understand how to create equivalent structures.
Emulsifiers are included in most industrial formulations for their
effect on fat structure, by displacing proteins from the air interface
and making fat globules more susceptible to partial coalescence.
However, 65 years ago the recognition of the colloidal state of ice
cream was in its infancy, egg yolk was the only emulsifier in use
and its functionality in partial coalescence of fat was not
understood. A very interesting reference is Chapter 8 from
Sommer (1944), Physical and physico-chemical properties of ice
cream mixes. ‘‘Many phases of ice cream making such as whipping,
freezing, crystallization, and body and texture are purely physical in
nature. Fundamental explanations for differences found in mixes
must, therefore, be related to physical or physico-chemical properties
of the product. Unfortunately that branch of physical chemistry,
which should be most useful, viz., colloid chemistry, is still a
comparatively new science and has not been applied very extensively
to dairy products. Further, the ice cream presents such a complex
picture from a colloidal viewpoint, and the experimental facts are still
so meager, that an exhaustive discussion cannot be attempted.’’
Nevertheless, a 41-page chapter followed that paragraph, which is
most interesting reading.
The pioneering literature with regards to fat destabilization in
ice cream and emulsifier functionality in promoting that came
from Penn State University in the late 1950s and the work of Prof.
Philip Keeney and co-workers (Keeney, 1958, 1982; Keeney &
Josephson, 1958; Kloser & Keeney, 1959). Issues related to
butterfat churning had been recognized long before that (Fisk,
1919), but it was Keeney’s group that can be credited with
bringing a colloidal understanding to that process and to the
action of emulsifiers in promoting it. Modern emulsifiers (i.e.,
mono- and di-glycerides, polysorbates) were beginning to appear
at that time as potential ice cream ingredients to replace the
functionality of egg yolk, and their behaviour was providing much
insight into fat structure (Knightly, 1959). Subsequently, advances
in the applications of colloid science to dairy products provided a
greater understanding of partial coalescence (Mulder & Walstra,
1974). Recognition of the importance of adsorption of interfacial
material to the fat globule and formation of the fat globule
membrane in terms of product behaviour and ingredient
functionality was also developed through this time period (Berger
& White, 1976; Bird & Stainsby, 1974; Musselwhite & Walker,
1971). As microscopy techniques evolved and were applied
successfully to examination of ice cream structure (Alsafar &
Wood, 1968; Berger, Bullimore, White, & Wright, 1972; Berger &
White, 1971), further structural insights were gained. Develop-
ments in rheology and applications to ice cream were also
apparent during this same time period (Sherman, 1965, 1966,
1969; Shama & Sherman, 1966) or subsequently (Goff et al., 1995).
During the last two decades, all these developments plus further
extensive research have led to a much more complete under-
standing of partial coalescence of fat and its control in ice cream
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
756 H.D. Goff / International Dairy Journal 18 (2008) 754–758
(Goff, 1997, 2002; Goff, Verespej, & Smith, 1999), leading to a more
fully developed description of Keeney’s original ideas about fat
structure.
Emulsifier functionality, the composition of the fat interface
and its role in partial coalescence continues to receive consider-
able research attention. Bolliger, Goff, and Tharp (2000a) showed
a direct relationship between protein content (mg m 2), resulting
from displacement by emulsifiers, and partial coalescence. Davies,
Dickinson, and Bee (2000, 2001) suggested that the effect of
saturated versus unsaturated emulsifiers on partial coalescence
might be more than one of protein displacements but might also
affect fat crystal habit within the globules. The work of Segall and
Goff (1999, 2002a, b) focused on a minimal coverage of whey
protein at the fat interface, as created by selective homogeniza-
tion, as a means of achieving optimal partial coalescence in
formulations with no added emulsifiers. Koxholt, Eisenmann, and
Hinrichs (2001) also showed that selective homogenization of the
fat with only a portion of the protein and emulsifier can produce
acceptable fat globule size distributions. The trend here suggests
research seems to be moving from developing the understanding
to manipulation of it for functional benefit.
3.2. Proteins—functionality and the development of whey-derived
ingredients
Milk protein is present in ice cream formulations as part of the
milk solids-not-fat component, which traditionally has been
supplied by the serum portion of cream and milk, and by the
inclusion of condensed milk or milk powder. Much of the early
research in the area of milk solids-not-fat in ice cream formulations
focused on its effect on emulsification and whipping properties,
without recognizing the individual functionality of the different
milk proteins, or of the crystallization properties of lactose
(Sommer, 1944). For most of the last 65 years, there has been a
desire to utilize whey solids as a replacement for a portion of the
milk solids-not-fat, driven primarily by cost saving. The first paper
in this area was by Leighton (1944), who proposed that about 25%
of the milk solids-not-fat content could be replaced by whey
powder without negatively affecting flavour and texture, a value
that has been used as a benchmark for many years since. Beyond
that, defects could be expected in lactose crystallization, softness
and ice recrystallization, and off-flavours, particularly saltiness.
Most of the whey product-related research for ice cream over the
next 35 years focused on whey powder (Neilsen, 1963). However, as
the whey processing industry has developed and evolved over the
last 30 years and membrane technologies have come into wide-
spread use for the production of whey-based ingredients with
higher protein contents than whey powder or different states of
denaturation/aggregation, researchers have turned their attention
from whey powder to whey proteins and have examined the
functionality of such whey protein concentrates in ice cream
(Alvarez, Wolters, Vodovotz, & Ji, 2005; Huse, Towler, & Harper,
1984; Lee & White, 1991; Parsons, Dybing, Coder, Spurgeon, & Seas,
1985; Smith, Bakshi, & Lomauro, 1984). It has now become
commonplace, within the last 20 years, to extensively substitute
the milk solids-not-fat portion of ice cream with milk-based dry
ingredients comprised of proprietary blends that include partially
denatured/aggregated whey protein concentrates, milk protein
concentrates, sodium caseinate, modified milk proteins, and whey
powder or lactose, blended to give protein contents of 18–25%.
Along with this evolution of the use of differing sources of milk
proteins in ice cream has come a much better understanding of
the specific functionalities that the proteins are expected to
deliver (Goff, 2003). Proteins adsorb at the fat interface during
homogenization, to render stability to the fat globule. Emulsifiers
are used to displace some of this protein and render the fat
globule susceptible to partial coalescence. Casein micelles are
more easily displaced from the fat interface than are either whey
proteins or caseinates. Milk proteins also adsorb to and, thus help
to stabilize the air bubble interface, along with adsorbed fat
globules, during whipping/aeration. It is important that not all
interfacial proteins are adsorbed to the fat interface, which is
created first, or there will be insufficient protein available during
the formation of the air interface (Zhang & Goff, 2004). Those
proteins not adsorbed to either the fat or air interface remain
dispersed or dissolved in solution, where they help to increase the
unfrozen phase viscosity by providing structure. The partially
denatured/aggregated whey proteins have been shown to be
especially functional in this regard (Relkin, Sourdet, Smith, Goff, &
Cuvelier, 2006; Sourdet, Relkin, & Cesar, 2003). Milk proteins are
generally incompatible with polysaccharide stabilizers and the
resulting depletion flocculation leads to phase separation between
the two, another consideration in terms of optimizing case-
in:whey protein ratios in milk protein blends (Syrbe, Bauer, &
Klostermeyer, 1998).
3.3. Ice—formation, recrystallization and stabilizer functionality
Ice recrystallization and stabilizer functionality is another very
important area of ingredients and structure research. Ice cream, of
course, contains ice crystals. Ice cream freezing curves, which
indicate the ice content as a function of temperature, have been
around, in close to their present form, for more than 75 years
(Leighton, 1927). Freezing methods need to be employed that
produce numerous small ice crystals, due to the strong link
between ice crystal size and coarse, icy texture (Russell, Cheney,
& Wantling, 1999) and this, too, has been recognized for 65 years
(Sommer, 1944). These ice crystals, however, are very prone to ice
recrystallization, a phenomenon that leads to coarse textures and
loss of shelf-life. Formulations need to ensure that ice crystals
undergo recrystallization as slowly as possible, and that is one of
the functionalities of the polysaccharide stabilizers. These ingre-
dients became available for use in ice cream during the late 1950s
and early 1960s and research into ice recrystallization and the
mechanisms of action of stabilizers in controlling have been
ongoing ever since (Buyong & Fennema, 1988; Cottrell, Pass, &
Phillips, 1979; Donhowe & Hartel, 1996; Flores & Goff, 1999; Harper
& Shoemaker, 1983; Muhr & Blanshard, 1986; Shipe, Roberts, &
Blanton, 1963; Smith & Wittinger, 1986; Sutton & Wilcox, 1998).
Sommer (1944) recognized the main functionality of stabilizers,
similar to what we do today (Marshall et al., 2003). ‘‘Gums of
various kinds find use as stabilizers in ice cream because of their
characteristic property of imbibing or absorbing large amounts of
water. This characteristic is effective in limiting the natural tendency of
ice cream to become coarser in texture with storage, particularly under
retail cabinet conditions’’ (Sommer, 1944). Interestingly, though, the
only gum that he mentioned that is still in use today was locust
bean gum. We now recognize the importance of freeze-concentra-
tion for establishing the unfrozen phase and the behaviour of
stabilizers particularly in that phase with regards to entanglement,
cryo-gelation, and concentrated solution behaviour (Goff & Hartel,
2004; Hagiwara & Hartel, 1996; Regand & Goff, 2002, 2003). The
importance of protein/polysaccharide phase separation in the
freeze-concentrated unfrozen phase and its effect on ice recrys-
tallization has also been recently recognized (Regand & Goff, 2002,
2003), as has the importance of distribution of fat globules,
partially coalesced fat, and air bubbles into small, stable distribu-
tions for control of ice recrystallization (Barfod, 2001).
There has also been much recent discussion about the
importance of the glassy state for storage stability (Goff, Caldwell,
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
H.D. Goff / International Dairy Journal 18 (2008) 754–758
Stanley, & Maurice, 1993), but this has also been recognized for 65
years. Sommer (1944) stated: ‘‘Glass state. With solutions that are
highly viscous, the above factors may prevent crystallization entirely
even though the solution is highly supersaturated far into the labile
zone. This condition is known as the ‘‘glass’’ state. This can readily be
illustrated by a sugar solution. If a sugar solution is boiled and
concentrated to a point so that on sudden cooling it forms a very
viscous syrup (almost or actually solid), the cooled mass will be clear
and non-crystalline and will remain in this ‘‘glass’’ stable over long
periods of time. Such sugar solutions in a glass state have been known
to remain non-crystalline over a period of several years. It is thought
that this state (with respect to sucrose and lactose) is involved in the
concentrated unfrozen portion of ice cream at hardening room
temperatures’’. Ice recrystallization is still recognized as one of the
major quality defects in ice cream limiting its shelf-life and
bringing forth consumer complaints. This is perhaps exacerbated
by the global shipments of ice cream occurring regularly and by
the long distribution chains and mass distribution in modern
supermarkets, which places more demands on heat shock stability
due to temperature fluctuations than ever before. There is a clear
trend toward studying various factors related to ice recrystalliza-
tion in the complex milieu of ice cream rather than in model
systems, taking into account structural effects such as emulsifier
action, fat destabilization, air distribution, and phase separations,
interactions that were previously not considered, and this is
undoubtedly the way progress will be made. Novel ingredients are
also being suggested to help control ice recrystallization, such as
the ice structuring (‘‘anti-freeze’’) proteins that can be extracted
from natural sources (Regand & Goff, 2006).
4. Manufacturing
Although the principles of ice cream manufacturing—ingre-
dient blending, mix pasteurization and homogenization, dynamic
freezing and whipping, inclusion addition, static hardening—have
not changed in 65 years, the modern ice cream plant, with its level
of automation and hygiene, is considerably different than its
forerunners. Mix processing in 1941 was all done by batch
pasteurization (Sommer, 1944). While that is still common today
in many operations, most large installations have moved to
continuous (high-temperature short-time) pasteurization. The
modern continuous ice cream freezer is a sophisticated and
highly controlled and automated piece of equipment and some of
the advances in equipment technology have come about only very
recently, within the last 10–20 years. The earliest electrical
freezers were batch style and either salt and ice or brine cooled,
but the design was based on the principles of a scraped surface
freezer, as today. The evolution of the continuous freezer is also
very interesting. From Sommer (1944): ‘‘Continuous freezers did
not win wide acceptance until the ‘‘Vogt Instant’’ freezer was
introduced in 1929. This was followed by the Creamery Package
continuous freezer in 1934. A high percentage of the total ice cream
production in this country is now by continuous freezers’’. Contin-
uous freezers remained quite similar for many years until air
injection methods for the introduction of sterile air brought about
major changes in design. This concern arose due to the
identification of the pathogen Listeria monocytogenes in dairy
and ice cream manufacturing facilities in the 1980s and the
suggestion that it could be carried in aerosols within the wet
processing environment. Modern continuous freezers can process
volumes of 3000–4000 L h 1, equipped with filtered air, exact
control of overrun and dosing of particulate ingredients. Produc-
tion rates of freezers can be synchronized with those of filling
machines (Marshall et al., 2003). Recent research has made the
important link between processing parameters and structure
757
(Kokubo, Sakurai, Iwaki, Tomita, & Yoshida, 1998; Russell et al.,
1999). Perhaps one of the most innovative advances in ice cream
freezing has come about in the last decade with developments in
low temperature extrusion freezers capable of taking ice cream at
5 1C from conventional scraped surface freezers and reducing its
temperature through a single- or twin-screw extruder to 14 1C
(Wildmoser & Windhab, 2001; Wildmoser, Scheiwiller, & Wind-
hab, 2004). In addition to a tremendous energy cost saving
through elimination of ice cream freezing in large static hardening
freezers, this process has a dramatic effect on all elements of ice
cream structure (Bolliger, Kornbrust, Goff, Tharp, & Windhab,
2000b) and is capable of greatly improving ice cream quality.
A considerable effort is also devoted today to the development
of sophisticated machinery for the production of novelty or
impulse products. There was no mention of novelties by Sommer
(1944). However, the following quote from his 1951 edition shows
the development of interest in these products:
‘‘Novelties: The idea of merchandising ice cream and other frozen
confections in novel forms holds considerable appeal to ice cream
manufacturers with an aggressive sales policy. Such items, in addition
to their direct contribution to sales volume, are thought by many to
have publicity value, serving to attract consumer interest and
creating the impression of alertness and progressiveness. In some
instances it is anticipated that the novelty value will be short-lived
and may therefore be planned for only one season. Accordingly, it is
fruitless to undertake detailed descriptions, and obviously ‘‘novelties’’
of the future cannot be foreseen. There are, however, items that have
shown considerable stability, and though they have graduated from
the ‘‘novelty’’ class, they are usually still so designated. The more
stable novelties are: chocolate-coated ice cream bars, popsicles or
frozen suckers, ice cream sandwiches and ice cream cake rolls’’.
For many years, novelties were limited to molded products,
cups, cones and sandwiches. Now, sophisticated and novel
processing technology for manufacture of hand-held impulse
products is readily available, giving rise to a myriad of new
introductions around the world. Equipment for extruded novelty
production was introduced in the 1980s. Today, extrusion
processing has enabled a vast array of shapes and sizes. Fluting,
layering and other fancy molding is widely seen in both single-
serving products and in ice cream cakes, much of it from
automated, continuous processes. High quality production of 3D
molded products with high definition details is possible with new
molding processes. Extruded and molded products can be shaped
in post-extrusion or molding processes with deep cooled, non-
stick tools with high definition (Marshall et al., 2003).
5. Conclusions
Ice cream science and technology has come a long way in 65
years. Technological advances have been made in ingredients and
processes, while scientific advances have been made in under-
standing functionality of these ingredients, structure, and stabi-
lity. The ice cream industry world-wide is a huge, global business.
The product is a complex colloid that presents scientific and
technological challenges with every advance. To the consumer,
however, ice cream is usually associated with pleasure, enjoyment
and fun. The recognition that science and technology exists within
it often comes with amusement. It is paradoxical that what can
seem so simple is indeed so complex.
References
Adapa, S., Schmidt, K. A., Jeon, I. J., Herald, T. J., & Flores, R. A. (2000). Mechanisms
of ice crystallization and recrystallization in ice cream: A review. Food Reviews
International, 16, 259–271.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
758 H.D. Goff / International Dairy Journal 18 (2008) 754–758
Alsafar, T. A., & Wood, F. W. (1968). Electron microscopic examination of ice cream.
Alexandria Journal of Agricultural Research, 16, 135–142.
Alvarez, V. B., Wolters, C. L., Vodovotz, Y., & Ji, T. (2005). Physical properties of ice
cream containing milk protein concentrates. Journal of Dairy Science, 88,
862–871.
Barfod, N. (2001). The emulsifier effect. Dairy Industries International, 66, 32–33.
Berger, K. G., Bullimore, B. K., White, G. W., & Wright, W. B. (1972). The structure of
ice cream. Dairy Industries, 37, 419–425 493–497.
Berger, K. G., & White, G. W. (1971). An electron microscopical investigation of fat
destabilization in ice cream. Journal of Food Technology, 6, 285–294.
Berger, K. G., & White, G. W. (1976). The fat globule membrane in ice cream. Dairy
Industries International, 41, 199–243.
Bird, A. E., & Stainsby, G. (1974). The fat globule membrane in ice cream. Journal of
the Science of Food and Agriculture, 25, 1339–1348.
Bolliger, S., Goff, H. D., & Tharp, B. W. (2000a). Correlation between colloidal
properties of ice cream mix and ice cream. International Dairy Journal, 10,
303–309.
Bolliger, S., Kornbrust, B., Goff, H. D., Tharp, B. W., & Windhab, E. J. (2000b).
Influence of emulsifiers on ice cream produced by conventional freezing and
low temperature extrusion processing. International Dairy Journal, 10, 497–504.
Buyong, N., & Fennema, O. (1988). Amount and size of ice crystals in frozen
samples as influenced by hydrocolloids. Journal of Dairy Science, 71,
2630–2639.
Cottrell, J. I. L., Pass, G., & Phillips, G. O. (1979). Assessment of polysaccharides as
ice cream stabilizers. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 30,
1085–1088.
Davies, E., Dickinson, E., & Bee, R. D. (2000). Shear stability of sodium caseinate
emulsions containing monoglyceride and triglyceride crystals. Food Hydro-
colloids, 14, 145–153.
Davies, E., Dickinson, E., & Bee, R. D. (2001). Orthokinetic destabilization of
emulsions by saturated and unsaturated monoglycerides. International Dairy
Journal, 11, 827–836.
Donhowe, D. P., & Hartel, R. W. (1996). Recrystallization of ice during bulk storage
of ice cream. International Dairy Journal, 6, 1209–1221.
Fisk, W. W. (1919). The book of ice cream. New York, NY, USA: The MacMillan
Company.
Flores, A. A., & Goff, H. D. (1999). Recrystallization in ice cream after constant and
cycling temperature storage conditions as affected by stabilizers. Journal of
Dairy Science, 82, 1408–1415.
Goff, H. D. (1997). Colloidal aspects of ice cream—A review. International Dairy
Journal, 7, 363–373.
Goff, H. D. (2002). Formation and stabilization of structure in ice cream and related
products. Current Opinion in Colloid and Interface Science, 7, 432–437.
Goff, H. D. (2003). Ice cream. In 3rd ed.P. F. Fox, & P. L. H. McSweeney (Eds.),
Advanced dairy chemistry, Vol. 1: Proteins, pp. 1063–1082). New York, NY, USA:
Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
Goff, H. D. (2004). Present and future trends in ice cream science and technology.
In H. D. Goff, & B. W. Tharp (Eds.), Ice cream II. Special issue 401 (pp. 21–32).
Brussels, Belgium: International Dairy Federation.
Goff, H. D. (2006). Ice cream. In 3rd edP. F. Fox, & P. L. H. McSweeney (Eds.),
Advanced dairy chemistry. Vol. 2. Lipids, pp. 441–450). New York, NY, USA:
Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
Goff, H. D., Caldwell, K. B., Stanley, D. W., & Maurice, T. J. (1993). Influence of
polysaccharides on the glass transition in frozen sucrose solutions and ice
cream. Journal of Dairy Science, 76, 1268–1277.
Goff, H. D., Freslon, B., Sahagian, M. E., Hauber, T. D., Stone, A. P., & Stanley, D. W.
(1995). Structural development in ice cream—Dynamic rheological measure-
ments. Journal of Texture Studies, 26, 517–536.
Goff, H. D., & Hartel, R. W. (2004). Ice cream and frozen desserts. In Y. H. Hui (Ed.),
Handbook of frozen foods (pp. 499–570). New York, NY, USA: Marcel Dekker.
Goff, H. D., Verespej, E., & Smith, A. K. (1999). A study of fat and air structures in ice
cream. International Dairy Journal, 9, 817–829.
Hagiwara, Y., & Hartel, R. W. (1996). Effect of sweetener, stabilizer and storage
temperature on ice recrystallization in ice cream. Journal of Dairy Science, 79,
735–744.
Harper, E. K., & Shoemaker, C. F. (1983). Effect of locust beam gum and selected
sweetening agents on ice crystallization rates. Journal of Food Science, 48,
1801–1803 1806.
Hartel, R. W. (1998). Mechanisms and kinetics of recrystallization in ice cream. In
D. S. Reid (Ed.), The properties of water in foods, ISOPOW 6 (pp. 287–328). New
York, NY, USA: Blackie Academic and Professional.
Huse, P. A., Towler, C., & Harper, W. J. (1984). Substitution of non-fat milk solids in
ice cream with whey protein concentrate and hydrolyzed lactose. New Zealand
Journal of Dairy Science and Technology, 19, 255–261.
Keeney, P. G. (1958). The fat stability problem in ice cream. Ice Cream Review, 42,
26–28 42–45.
Keeney, P. G. (1982). Development of frozen emulsions. Food Technology, 36, 65–70.
Keeney, P. G., & Josephson, D. V. (1958). A measure of fat stability in ice cream. Ice
Cream Trade Journal, 54, 32–34 36, 64, 98.
Kloser, J. J., & Keeney, P. G. (1959). A study of some variables that affect fat stability
and dryness in ice cream. Ice Cream Trade Journal, 55, 26–28 30, 32, 86, 88, 92,
121.
Knightly, W. H. (1959). The role of the liquid emulsifier in relation to recent
research on ice cream emulsification. Ice Cream Trade Journal, 55, 24–26 28, 76,
90, 119–120.
Kokubo, S., Sakurai, K., Iwaki, S., Tomita, M., & Yoshida, S. (1998). Agglomeration of
fat globules during the freezing process of ice cream manufacturing.
Milchwissenschaft, 53, 206–209.
Koxholt, M. M. R., Eisenmann, B., & Hinrichs, J. (2001). Effect of the fat globule sizes
on the meltdown of ice cream. Journal of Dairy Science, 84, 31–37.
Lee, F. Y., & White, C. H. (1991). Effect of ultrafiltration retentates and whey protein
concentrates on ice cream quality during storage. Journal of Dairy Science, 74,
1170–1180.
Leighton, A. (1927). On the calculation of the freezing point in ice cream mixes and
of the quantities of ice separated during the freezing process. Journal of Dairy
Science, 10, 300–308.
Leighton, A. (1944). Use of whey solids in ice cream. Ice Cream Review, 27(6),
18–20.
Marshall, R. T., Goff, H. D., & Hartel, R. W. (2003). Ice cream (6th ed.). New York, NY,
USA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Muhr, A. H., & Blanshard, J. M. V. (1986). Effect of polysaccharide stabilizers on the
rate of growth of ice. Journal of Food Technology, 21, 683–710.
Mulder, H., & Walstra, P. (1974). The milk fat globule. Emulsion science as applied to
milk products and comparable foods. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Pudoc
Center for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation.
Musselwhite, P. R., & Walker, D. A. (1971). The effect of the colloidal state of the
emulsion on ice cream structure. Journal of Texture Studies, 2, 110–116.
Neilsen, A. J. (1963). Use of whey solids in ice cream and sherbets. Ice Cream
Review, 27, 18–20.
Parsons, J. G., Dybing, S. T., Coder, D. S., Spurgeon, K. R., & Seas, S. W. (1985).
Acceptability of ice cream made with processed wheys and sodium caseinate.
Journal of Dairy Science, 68, 2880–2885.
Regand, A., & Goff, H. D. (2002). Effect of biopolymers on structure and ice
recrystallization in dynamically-frozen ice cream model systems. Journal of
Dairy Science, 85, 2722–2732.
Regand, A., & Goff, H. D. (2003). Structure and ice recrystallization in frozen
stabilized ice cream model systems. Food Hydrocolloids, 17, 95–102.
Regand, A., & Goff, H. D. (2006). Ice recrystallization inhibition of ice structuring
proteins from winter wheat grass in model solutions and ice cream. Journal of
Dairy Science, 89, 49–57.
Relkin, P., Sourdet, S., Smith, A. K., Goff, H. D., & Cuvelier, G. (2006). Effects of whey
protein aggregation on fat globule microstructure in whipped frozen emul-
sions. Food Hydrocolloids, 20, 1050–1056.
Russell, A. B., Cheney, P. E., & Wantling, S. D. (1999). Influence of freezing
conditions on ice crystallization in ice cream. Journal of Food Engineering, 39,
179–191.
Segall, K. I., & Goff, H. D. (1999). Influence of adsorbed milk protein type and
surface concentration on the quiescent and shear stability of butteroil
emulsions. International Dairy Journal, 9, 683–691.
Segall, K. I., & Goff, H. D. (2002a). Secondary adsorption of milk protein from the
continuous phase to the oil–water interface in dairy emulsions. International
Dairy Journal, 12, 889–897.
Segall, K. I., & Goff, H. D. (2002b). A modified processing routine for ice cream that
promotes fat destabilization in the absence of added emulsifier. International
Dairy Journal, 12, 1013–1018.
Shama, F., & Sherman, P. (1966). The texture of ice cream. 2. Rheological properties
of frozen ice cream. Journal of Food Science, 31, 699–706.
Sherman, P. (1965). The texture of ice cream. Journal of Food Science, 30, 201–211.
Sherman, P. (1966). The texture of ice cream. 3. Rheological properties of mix and
melted ice cream. Journal of Food Science, 31, 707–716.
Sherman, P. (1969). Colloidal stability of ice cream mix. Journal of Texture Studies, 1,
43–51.
Shipe, W. F., Roberts, W. M., & Blanton, L. F. (1963). Effect of ice cream stabilizer on
the freezing characteristics of various aqueous systems. Journal of Dairy
Science, 46, 169–175.
Smith, D. E., Bakshi, A. S., & Lomauro, C. J. (1984). Changes in freezing point and
rheological properties of ice cream mix as a function of sweetener system and
whey substitution. Milchwissenschaft, 39, 455–457.
Smith, D. E., & Wittinger, S. A. (1986). Effect of sweeteners and stabilizers on the
structure of ice cream mix as determined by acoustic methods. Journal of Food
Processing and Preservation, 10, 227–235.
Sommer, H. H. (1944). The theory and practice of ice cream making (4th ed.).
Milwaukee, WI, USA: Olsen Publishing.
Sourdet, S., Relkin, P., & Cesar, B. (2003). Effects of milk protein type and pre-
heating on physical stability of whipped and frozen emulsions. Colloids and
Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, 31, 55–64.
Sutton, R. L., & Wilcox, J. (1998). Recrystallization in ice cream as affected by
stabilizers. Journal of Food Science, 63, 104–107.
Syrbe, A., Bauer, W. J., & Klostermeyer, H. (1998). Polymer science concepts in dairy
systems. An overview of milk protein and food hydrocolloid interaction.
International Dairy Journal, 3, 179–193.
Wildmoser, H., & Windhab, E. J. (2001). Impact of flow geometry and processing
parameters in ultra low temperature ice-cream extrusion (ULTICE) on ice-
cream microstructure. European Dairy Magazine, 13, 26–32.
Wildmoser, H., Scheiwiller, J., & Windhab, E. J. (2004). Impact of disperse
microstructure on rheology and quality aspects of ice cream. LWT—Food
Science and Technology, 37, 881–891.
Zhang, Z., & Goff, H. D. (2004). Protein distribution at air interfaces in dairy foams
and ice cream as affected by casein dissociation and emulsifiers. International
Dairy Journal, 14, 647–657.