You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Foods
  • Review
  • Open Access

10 December 2025

Whey—A Valuable Technological Resource for the Production of New Functional Products with Added Health-Promoting Properties

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
and
Department of Food Gastronomy and Food Hygiene, Institute of Human Nutrition Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences (WULS-SGGW), 159C Nowoursynowska St., 02-776 Warsaw, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
This article belongs to the Special Issue Whey Protein: Extraction, Functional Properties, and Applications

Abstract

Whey, a by-product of cheese and casein manufacture, represents a major output in dairy processing and a valuable resource for the production of functional foods. This review examines the technological, environmental, and nutritional aspects of whey valorization, emphasizing its transformation from an ecological burden to a raw material with high economic potential. Over time, whey has evolved from being regarded as waste product to becoming a strategic ingredient in the formulation of modern functional foods and bio-based materials. Data from January 2015 to October 2025 were collected from PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus to outline global whey production, utilization rates, and emerging processing methods. Modern membrane, enzymatic, and non-thermal technologies enable the recovery of valuable components, including proteins, lactose, and bioactive compounds. The use of these techniques reduces the biochemical and chemical oxygen demand in wastewater The review highlights the use of whey in functional beverages, milk and meat processing, edible films, bioplastics, and biofuels, as well as its microbiological and biotechnological potential. Results indicate that only about half of the 180–200 million tonnes of whey produced annually is effectively valorized, underscoring the need for integrated circular-economy approaches. Overall, whey valorization contributes to sustainable food production, environmental protection, and the development of innovative, health-promoting products that align with global strategies for waste reduction and the development of functional foods.

1. Introduction

Whey is a liquid by-product remaining after milk coagulation during cheese or casein manufacture. Coagulation primarily occurs as a result of the action of rennet-type enzymes. Whey production accounts for 65–80% of the volume of processed milk [1]. Depending on the pH, which is influenced by the method of milk curd production, the following types of whey are distinguished:
-
Sweet whey (rennet whey), obtained in the production of hard, semi-hard, and soft cheeses, as well as rennet casein (pH 5.9–6.3).
-
Acid whey, produced during the cottage cheese production. Coagulation is achieved mainly by acidification (pH 4.3–4.6) [2].
According to some sources, a third type of whey, known as casein whey, is obtained during the casein production process. Strong mineral acids, including sulfuric and hydrochloric acids, are used to precipitate the curd (pH 4.6–4.7) [3].
Whey is rich in many minerals and vitamins (vitamin C, B vitamins, riboflavin—B2, and pyridoxine—B6), and contains proteins (lactoglobulin, lactalbumin, immunoglobulin, proteose-peptones, lactoferrin), lactose, and trace amounts of fat. The composition of whey varies depending on the season, the source of milk, the type of cheese or yogurt being processed, the technological process, and the method of milk storage after milking. Depending on the processing technology, 50–60% of the milk dry matter ingredients pass into whey, including approximately: 95% of albumin, 95% of globulin, up to 33% of casein (including some coagulum), 96% of lactose, 8% of fat, and 81% of minerals [4].
Due to the lack of sustainable practices, whey is considered a significant source of environmental pollution by the dairy industry, with a high chemical oxygen demand (COD) of 60–80 g/L and a biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) of 30–50 g/L. Large amounts of whey are discharged into wastewater, posing a serious environmental risk. It should be emphasized that significant amounts of whey are not fully utilized and therefore still constitute an ecological problem. Acid whey requires pre-treatment before being discharged into the sewage system, preferably through a combination of physical and chemical processes [2]. The introduction of whey into the environment causes changes in soil structure, reduces crop yields, and, in water bodies, causes the destruction of aquatic ecosystems through the loss of dissolved oxygen [5,6].
On the other hand, milk processing offers significant opportunities for implementing the circular economy model through its use as a feed and energy source, an organic fertilizer [7], a food component, as well as for the production of bioplastics [8], biochemicals [9], and biocatalysts [10]. Therefore, whey can be considered either a waste product or a by-product [11]. By 2030, whey is expected to become an increasingly important strategic ingredient, as growing demand for specialty proteins collides with sustainability-driven supply constraints. Innovation and collaboration across the value chain will be essential to realizing new opportunities in nutrition, medical, and performance applications [12].
This review aims to assess the potential of whey valorization and to discuss current technological, environmental, and nutritional strategies for its utilization in the context of the circular economy and sustainable development. The topic appears to be important for all concerned sectors, including science, agriculture, and the dairy industry. Over the past decades, the global production of processed whey has steadily increased. This creates the need for new directions in its management. Although considerable work has already been done in this area, including valorization strategies [11,13], as well as whey processing [14,15] strategies, the problem remains urgent, and current solutions are insufficient. The review presents the latest data regarding possibilities of whey by-product utilization, which align with the global sustainable development goals [16]. This review, unlike others published recently, takes into account the latest data from the past decade and broadly discusses the whey potential issue, including extraction, management methods, and use, concerning environmental protection strategies. A novelty is the SWOT analysis, which summarizes the collected data.

2. Materials and Methods

All data presented in this narrative review were summarized from the references, including scientific journals and book chapters. The references were searched in the databases PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, using the keywords: “whey” AND, “technological process” (OR “processing technology”), AND “utilization” (OR “valorization”). To search for the maximum number of relative references, the keyword was set as “whey and technological process, and/or utilization”, and the search scope was limited to the years 2015 to October 2025. During the period from 1 October 2025 to 5 October 2025, we identified 978 items in these databases, but after analysis, we excluded those (n = 798) that did not meet our inclusion criteria: time period, English language, and that were duplicated in both databases. Ultimately, we selected 164 items for review (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Flow diagram of the literature search and selection process.

3. Results

3.1. The Scale of Unused Whey Worldwide and the Associated Environmental Pollution

The increase in milk production is the primary driver of the growing volume of generated whey. Global milk production has risen by 59% since 1988, reaching 944 million tonnes in 2023. This corresponds to the generation of approximately 200 million tonnes of whey annually as an industrial by-product [17]. Depending on the type of cheese produced—such as hard or semi-hard—roughly 1 kg of cheese is made from 10 L of milk, while the remaining 9 L becomes whey, which can reach several million liters per day in large factories [18]. For acid-coagulated cheeses, the ratio is approximately 10 L of whey per 1 kg of cheese. In comparison, soft cheese production, partial moisture, and protein retention may result in a higher percentage of cheese (less whey), and in hard cheese production, the opposite is true. Whey yield in soft cheese production is influenced by the casein concentration in the milk and the whey protein-to-casein ratio, although the latter does not significantly affect coagulation or drainage [18,19,20,21,22,23]. The estimated global whey production and utilization are presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Global Raw Liquid Whey Production and Utilization by Region.
At an estimated yearly increase of 1–2%, the global volume is expected to rise to about 203–241 million metric tonnes by 2030 [33]. Only 50–60% of this whey is valorized, while 40–50% remains untreated or is used for low-value applications (applications that do not generate high added value and often only serve to dispose of the product, e.g., direct use as animal feed, spraying on fields as fertilizer, or discharging into sewers/treatment plants), posing environmental risks [13,34,35]. As estimated, only 25% of whey is used for direct human consumption, e.g., whey protein concentrates in food products, functional drinks, fat–protein additives, dietary products [29,35]. As such, efforts have been underway to reduce this form of food waste and to valorize this by-product. Valorisation refers to whey products and fractions that have been processed to obtain valuable products—e.g., whey powders (WPC, WPI), protein concentrates, protein isolate, lactose products, industrial preparations (enzymes, cultures), and raw materials for the food and pharmaceutical industries. Valorisation encompasses both food applications and certain industrial products with higher economic value [18].
The European Union and the United States are the largest producers of whey (accounting for ~70%), followed by China (9%), Canada (4%), Australia (3%), and the rest of the world (∼13%) [26,36,37]. In 2023, Germany led the EU in whey production, accounting for 14.1 million tonnes, or approximately 27% of the total. The Netherlands and Poland were the second and third-largest producers, with about 8.8 million and 5.2 million tonnes, respectively [26]. However, the existing literature data on global whey production are limited, fragmented, and often methodologically inconsistent. Reliable and comparable data are largely unavailable, making it difficult to quantify the total volume of whey generated worldwide and to determine the share that is effectively recovered or utilized. Estimation approaches vary considerably, with no standardized tools or conversion frameworks linking milk and cheese production to whey outputs. In this context, the current review addressed gaps concerning methodological limitations of whey production data extraction. The use of methods such as data triangulation or duplicate exclusion would allow for the collection and presentation of the latest and most reliable information on the scale of whey production.
Due to the growing consumer demand for cheese, yogurt, and other dairy products in recent years, the amount of waste from whey production has consequently increased. Dairy production is also highlighted as one of the most energy-intensive sectors with respect to its global warming potential. The high biological oxygen demand (BOD)—which measures the amount of dissolved oxygen that microorganisms consume to break down organic matter in a water sample over a specific period of time—ranged from 30 to 50 g/L in the case of whey, in which sweet whey ranged from 40 to 102 g/L, whereas acid whey ranged between 52 and 62 g/L [2].
The second important indicator of environmental status is chemical oxygen demand (COD), which measures the total amount of oxygen needed to oxidize organic and inorganic matter in a water sample. COD values for whey ranged from 60 to 80 g/L, whereas sweet and acid whey differed (27–60 g/L and 35–51 g/L, respectively). The differences between the whey types are connected with the chemical composition of the samples. Acid whey is lower in lactose in comparison to sweet whey, which may allude to the generally lower COD and BOD values reported in the literature. Regardless that acid whey may have a lower lactose content, its BOD/COD remains high due to increased protein solubility at lower pH [2,38].
Moreover, it should be emphasized that the high BOD and COD of waste whey render it a potent environmental pollutant. Discharging waste whey into the ground, directly into receiving water bodies without pre-treatment, or discharging it into sewage causes environmental pollution, even though cheese whey has been used in agriculture for many years as a fertilizer or animal feed due to its high nutrient content [5].
Land application of whey has been practiced for decades in the USA, Canada, and Australia, as a slow-release nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer. This practice is generally considered sustainable because whey has been reported to provide an adequate substitute for potassic superphosphate, while some soil properties are improved. However, adverse changes in soil properties, such as salinity, as well as depressed plant growth, can result from high application rates. Sodium accumulation following high-rate whey application is likely to occur at greater soil depths, ultimately affecting future land uses [39]. On the other hand, whey by-product is still identified as a valuable source of nutrients by the paneer industry [33]. Because of that, lactose and milk proteins are the main components causing high BOD and COD levels in whey; it is expected that lactose and protein recovery can help reduce the BOD and COD loads of whey, thereby solving the environmental pollution problem caused by whey disposal [2]. However, this requires further research and will be discussed in detail later in this review.
Recent EU waste regulations, such as Directive 2006/12/EC [40], Directive 91/271/EEC [41], and Directive 1999/31/EC [42], encourage the dairy plants in the EU to valorize whey and dairy wastewater, which usually undergo centralized treatment.
Wastewater in the dairy industry is characterized by:
-
solids (gross and finely dispersed/suspended);
-
low and high pH levels;
-
free edible fat/oil;
-
emulsified material, e.g., edible fat/oil;
-
soluble biodegradable organic material, e.g., BOD;
-
volatile substances, e.g., ammonia and organics;
-
plant nutrients, e.g., phosphorus and/or nitrogen;
-
pathogens, e.g., from sanitary water;
-
dissolved non-biodegradable organics [12].
The rising costs of wastewater treatment have stimulated the growth of the whey valorization market [43]. Dairy companies that recover or use whey significantly reduce the volume of wastewater, which affects BOD (Biochemical Oxygen Demand) and COD (Chemical Oxygen Demand) parameters, the fat content in water, as well as the total nitrogen compounds. For example, from cheese production, when a dairy plant that recovers or uses whey, it significantly reduces BOD by 55%, COD by 74%, fat by 79%, and total nitrogen compounds by 43.4% [12,44].
The bio-economy strategy is one of the major food waste prevention policies in the EU. The Waste Framework Directive [45] prioritizes waste prevention through treatment for reuse (valorisation), recycling, and recovery. Due to its high level of contamination, the valorisation of whey is linked to the achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals, such as Goal 6. Clean Water and Sanitation, Goal 12. Responsible consumption and production, and Goal 13. Climate Action [16], as well as the principles of a circular economy (Zero Waste). The use of whey helps reduce water pollution (reduced BOD/COD), and the production of new valuable products [2,46].
It is difficult to obtain detailed information on the scale of whey valorisation due to the large number of dairies, but some authors [47,48] suggest that, for example, valorisation of waste whey can reduce the environmental impact of some cheese production by up to 15%. It should be noted that dairy products have been identified as energy-intensive in terms of their Global Warming Potential (GWP) values [49].

3.2. Whey from a By-Product (Disposal) to a Valuable Dairy Product—Changes from the 1950s to the Present

Although significant progress has been made in whey processing over the past few decades, as shown in Figure 2, challenges remain in optimizing these processes for maximum efficiency and sustainability.
Figure 2. Evolution of whey processing (1960–2025). Explanatory Note: WPC—Whey Protein Concentrate, DWP—Demineralized Whey Powder, WPI—Whey Protein Isolate, WPH—Whey Protein Hydrolysate.
  • 1960s–1970s
Cheese was originally manufactured on a small, local scale as a way to preserve milk; consequently, whey was largely considered a waste product. It was discharged directly into water or sewage without pretreatment or stored in tanks. Disposal methods included using cheese whey as fertilizer, which posed a significant environmental risk due to its nutrient content. Contamination of water bodies with whey can lead to the death of aquatic organisms. Moreover, the accumulation of total suspended solids and fat from cheese industry wastewater on the soil damages its structure. Biological treatment, such as anaerobic or aerobic degradation processes, results in a reduction in organic contamination; however, these methods also have many disadvantages, such as the need for specific microorganisms, long hydraulic retention times, or fat flotation [5,6,9].
Whey was primarily used for animal feed, but also for the production of some food products, such as fermented whey beverages. As cheese production grew to a larger scale, this became cumbersome. The factors driving the development of whey protein products varied significantly between the United States, Europe, and New Zealand, where the greatest growth was observed. In the Midwestern United States, environmental concerns related to pollution caused by high volumes of discharge were a major factor driving development in the late 1960s. Estimating a maximum BOD level of 20 ppm for dairy wastewater, regardless of discharge location, was the main reason for the development of the whey processing industry. The drying of whey using roller dryers was introduced to produce so-called “popcorn whey.” This product was characterized by high agglomeration of whey proteins (hence the term “popcorn”), low drying efficiency (whey contains only ~6.5% dry matter), and low commercial value—it was sold primarily as pig feed. This phenomenon was a response to the introduction of a BOD limit for dairy wastewater at the time, which prohibited the discharge of untreated whey. However, this process was inefficient, and the rising cost of natural gas in the early 1970s made this production unprofitable. The development of an economical method for pre-concentrating whey before roller drying initiated the introduction of membrane filtration into the dairy industry [50].
The increase in dairy production has necessitated the introduction of innovative processing methods that enable the effective management of whey. Whey protein products have evolved from the initial production of whey protein concentrate (WPC) and whey protein isolate (WPI) in the 1970s to the diverse range of whey protein products produced today.
  • 1980s–1990s—New whey processing techniques
In the early 1970s, a membrane process known as ultrafiltration (UF) was introduced for whey processing. At the end of the 20th century, other membrane processes, nanofiltration (NF) and microfiltration (MF), were also used for this purpose. This resulted in reduced BOD levels in wastewater and increased interest in value-added whey products within the European industry. More emphasis was placed on the use of ultrafiltration (UF). Denmark was the first country to use this process, producing a lactose-rich product as a fermentation substrate. In New Zealand, the development of beverage companies contributed to the development of whey processing [50,51].
Until the early 1990s, most WPC produced was WPC34/35. It was usually produced in relatively simple spray dryers as a fine powder and used as animal feed or in the food industry. Since the late 1980s, whey protein has attracted considerable attention due to the growing body of research examining not only its nutritional properties but also its bioactive properties [50,51].
At the end of the 20th century, instantized whey protein powder was developed. This product was obtained without added carbohydrates, using the wet agglomeration method, and with improved solubility compared to the prototype developed in 1987. In the 1990s, due to the demand in the sports nutrition market, the demand for high-protein powders increased, which led to their further development [50,51].
  • 21st Century—Next-generation whey products
Currently, the goal of dairy producers is to develop new products and improve traditional dairy items into next-generation products with rich nutritional properties. New technologies enable the separation and extraction of whey protein fractions from whey, through methods such as ion exchange (demineralization) and membrane techniques (reverse osmosis, nanofiltration, ultrafiltration, microfiltration), additionally allowing for the fractionation and concentration of whey [52].
Whey is used as an ingredient to produce complex food products from its waste whey through solids recovery techniques such as nano-, micro-, and ultrafiltration. For example, whey cream with a fat content of 25–30% can be separated from waste whey and used to standardize milk in cheese or butter production or to enrich beverages with protein and essential amino acids.
Cross-flow membrane filtration, including ultrafiltration and nanofiltration, has revolutionized industrial whey processing over the past 50 years. These techniques have enabled the production of WPC and WPI with high protein content and purity. Techniques such as simulated moving bed chromatography and membrane adsorption have improved the separation and fractionation of whey proteins, improving product quality [50,53].
Nowadays, whey processing uses modern, sustainable methods that can lead to the production of new, valuable products in the dairy industry, contributing to the circular economy.

3.3. Whey: A Microbiological Overview

The microbiological profile of whey is highly diverse, originating primarily from raw milk, starter cultures, and the processing environment. This is due to the interplay of natural milk microbiota, technological and hygienic factors, and other practices, which determine the safety and functionality of whey-based products.
Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) populations influence not only acidification and flavor development but also the microbiological safety of whey through the production of antimicrobial substances such as organic acids and bacteriocins [54]. Alongside LAB, yeasts represent a significant component of whey microbiota. The dominant genera include species Kluyveromyces, Candida, and Saccharomyces, which are widely used in the biotechnological valorization of whey and in the natural fermentation of whey-based beverages [55,56,57].
The coexistence of LAB and yeasts in whey often results in symbiotic interactions—yeasts release growth factors (vitamins, amino acids) that stimulate LAB growth, while LAB favor low pH values, creating favorable conditions for yeast fermentation. This microbial synergy supports the development of traditional fermented whey beverages and bioactive products [54]. Beneficial LAB species such as Lactococcus lactis, Lactobacillus helveticus, and Streptococcus thermophilus inhibit undesirable microorganisms through acidification, bacteriocin production, and competitive exclusion [58]. A balanced and stable LAB community enhances microbiological quality, maintaining low pH and reducing spoilage or pathogen proliferation. Such whey is a promising substrate for the production of probiotic beverages and as a base medium for other ways of valorization [59].
Whey, a nutrient-rich by-product of cheese manufacture, provides an excellent substrate for microbial growth due to its high content of lactose, peptides, minerals, and vitamins [60]. These components create optimal conditions for the proliferation of LAB and yeasts, which drive two principal types of microbiological transformations—lactic and alcoholic fermentation. Both processes are fundamental for the biotechnological valorization of whey into functional products such as fermented beverages, probiotic cultures, and bioethanol [61,62,63]. The main products of lactic fermentation, such as lactic acid and other organic acids, reduce the redox potential and promote the growth of acid-tolerant beneficial microbiota [31].
Conversely, the ethanolic fermentation of whey, carried out under either aerobic or anaerobic conditions depending on the desired end product, is primarily driven by Kluyveromyces marxianus. This yeast possesses β-galactosidase activity, enabling the hydrolysis of lactose into glucose and galactose, which are subsequently fermented to ethanol [64]. Under controlled fermentation conditions, K. marxianus also produces volatile esters, aldehydes, and organic acids that contribute to the flavor profile of fermented whey beverages and play a key role in whey valorization [65].
The efficiency of these bioconversion processes depends on the precise control of key fermentation parameters, such as temperature, pH, inoculum level, aeration, agitation, and fermentation duration, which collectively influence microbial growth dynamics, substrate metabolism, and overall metabolite yield [66,67]. Nevertheless, variations in the native microbial population may lead to inconsistent fermentation performance and reduced process predictability. Therefore, in industrial applications, the natural microbiota must be carefully monitored or standardized to ensure reproducible fermentation efficiency and product safety [68].
Another representative group of the health-promoting metabolites occurring in whey is organic acids, with lactic acid being a dominant compound. However, during lactic fermentation, LAB also produce acetic acid and phenyllactic acid (PLA), which results from the metabolism of aromatic amino acids, among other compounds. These organic acids lower the pH, disrupt cell membranes, and chelate metals, all of which contribute to antimicrobial and antifungal effects. Additionally, they enhance the antioxidant capacity of fermented whey products [23,69].
The low pH of acid whey inhibits the growth of many pathogens, but does not guarantee full inactivation. Acid-resistant strains, such as Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Listeria monocytogenes, can survive in low-pH fermented dairy. While growth is unlikely in acid whey, the survival of contaminants at refrigeration temperatures is possible for weeks [70,71]. Additionally, whey and whey products can be contaminated by aerobic mesophiles, coliforms, enterobacteria, and microorganisms that might come from diseased animals [72].
In summary, lactic fermentation of whey offers strong advantages in microbiological safety because LAB produce organic acids and bacteriocins that lower pH, inhibit spoilage organisms, and support the development of probiotic and functional products. Its main limitations are that low pH does not fully eliminate acid-resistant pathogens, and natural microbiota variability can reduce process consistency. In contrast, alcoholic fermentation—driven mainly by Kluyveromyces marxianus—efficiently converts lactose to ethanol and generates desirable flavor compounds, but it is more sensitive to fermentation conditions and offers less intrinsic microbial inhibition than lactic fermentation. Both methods enable valuable biotransformation of whey, yet each has trade-offs between safety, product quality, and process robustness.

3.4. Whey Proteins and Other Whey Constituents, and Their Functionality

Biotechnological processes are considered an attractive direction for managing and processing whey. Whey, as a by-product, is a cheap substrate for various methods and is also very valuable due to its composition. The selection of appropriate microorganisms capable of transforming the components contained in whey (mainly lactose) and the proper process conditions allows the production of valuable products, most frequently used in the food and pharmaceutical industries [3,73]. Whey is also used in animal feed, in meat production, in the production of dietary foods and high-protein supplements, as a source of potentially probiotic lactic acid bacteria (Lactobacillus sp. and Bifidobacterium sp.), in biotechnology, and for enriching food and pharmaceutical products. Whey is also used in the confectionery, bakery, pastry, and dairy industries. These activities help reduce food waste and protect the environment [74,75].
Whey protein is widely used to increase the biological value, improve textural, physical, and other functional properties of foods, enhance sensory characteristics, and formulate low-lactose, high-protein products. Changing consumer preferences are driving food and beverage manufacturers to add functional whey protein to their products, as it can replace high-fat and expensive ingredients like cream cheese, milk, and butter while maintaining the original appearance, flavor, and texture of the products. Whey protein is used in the food industry in baked goods, dairy products, beverages, breakfast cereals, chocolate, and baby food for its antihypertensive and antibacterial properties [74,75]. Whey protein hydrolysate (WPH) has antimicrobial, antioxidant, and antihypertensive properties. It is used in the production of clinical nutrition, sports nutrition, and infant nutrition products. WPH is also used in the production of bakery products, low-fat foods, dietary foods, and protein-fortified beverages. Consumer preferences for incorporating protein into everyday foods, along with the growing demand for high-protein, low-fat products to support weight management, are expected to drive growth in this segment. WPC offers an affordable alternative to caramel mixes, boasting excellent taste and processability. WPC is used in various applications, including the production of yogurts, dairy drinks, and desserts. Furthermore, these concentrates are used to enrich infant formulas and food products with protein. When heated and dissolved in water, WPC exhibits gelling properties, which are useful in applications in the meat and food industries [74,75]. Table 2 presents whey protein preparation and its application.
Table 2. Whey proteins and other constituents, functional properties, and applications.

3.5. Novel Whey Processing Methods

Sustainable whey processing techniques, which provide important value-added products for the dairy industry, include:
-
Thermosonication—used to produce whey beverages, including fermented whey beverages. This method offers better microbiological quality and enhanced antioxidant, antihypertensive, and antidiabetic activities; reduces the degradation of ascorbic acid, improves rheological properties, and provides a more favorable volatile compound profile when compared to beverages treated with short-term thermal heating.
-
Ohmic heating and spray drying—used in the production of whey protein, such as WPH, WPI, WPC.
-
Cross-flow microfiltration—used for concentrate whey as native powder, deproteinized powder, or delactozed powder.
-
Electroactivation—whey lactose is used to produce galactooligosaccharides (GOS), lactitol, lactulose, and lactosucrose.
-
Reverse osmosis—whey water for water recovery.
-
Membrane technologies (microfiltration, ultrafiltration, nanofiltration, emerging membrane processes, integration of membrane technologies)—used for clarification or fractioning, as well as to increase the concentration of specific components (concentrates whey proteins and decreases non-protein components), or their separation. Moreover, this process leads to a highly efficient separation of phenolic compounds while ensuring bacterial reduction. This results in high-value whey protein concentrates (WPCs) and isolates (WPIs), which are rich in essential amino acids and ideal for sports nutrition and dietary supplements.
-
Enzymatic hydrolysis—improves the functional properties of whey proteins through controlled cleavage of peptide bonds, which reduces molecular weight and increases the exposure of polar groups; and improves solubility, emulsification ability, and foam stability. Hydrolysates are ingredients in functional foods, beverages, and products with regenerative properties.
-
Unconventional technologies, including intensive ultrasound, cold plasma, microwave, supercritical carbon dioxide, and ohmic heating—a non-thermal and gentle method that helps preserve the physicochemical, nutritional, and sensory properties of whey [14,50,51,52,88,112,114,115,116].
These innovations and modern technologies enable the production of high-purity whey protein concentrates, isolates, hydrolysates, and fractions with a wide range of applications and other specialized products that address the increasing market demand for whey-based components. This also includes the production of whey powders, edible films, and biofuels, which further contribute to a more sustainable dairy industry by maximizing resource utilization [3].
It is worth mentioning that the use of various techniques of whey valorisation has its advantages and disadvantages. These techniques are characterized by different efficiency, operating costs, and environmental impact, which requires informed selection depending on the desired end product.
For example, membrane separation techniques such as microfiltration, ultrafiltration, and nanofiltration are more economical and environmentally friendly than traditional methods. Because they operate at low temperatures, they consume less energy than thermal methods and provide high separation selectivity [117]. Currently, they constitute the most advanced group of methods in terms of scalability, separation efficiency, and relatively low energy consumption. However, their main limitation remains membrane clogging and the need for regular regeneration. These techniques ensure the recovery rate of 50–55% of whey protein (WP) with better functional quality (recovery of an individual fraction of protein with a purity of 90%), and are relatively simple, cost-effective, and consume less energy compared to other methods [116].
These methods cannot be used to valorize acid whey due to differences in composition (higher acid content and lower pH) that affect the behavior of lactose, which tends to crystallize, making filtration difficult. The advantage of this method is its relatively low cost compared to chromatographic techniques and mild heat treatment, which preserves bioactive compounds [118,119,120]. To obtain demineralized whey, it is concentrated by evaporation or reverse osmosis (RO), and then is processed using ion exchange columns. These processes are used on an industrial scale but require high capital and operational costs, both for infrastructure and for maintaining column regeneration systems, which affects the total production cost [121].
Compared to these methods, new-generation technologies—such as thermosonication (TS), cold plasma, intense ultrasound, and supercritical carbon dioxide (SC-CO2) —stand out for their ability to preserve bioactive compounds and improve the sensory quality of the product. However, their implementation is limited by higher energy consumption and equipment costs and a lack of full process standardization. For example, the disadvantage of the TS method is scalability, as it requires expensive equipment and may not be suitable for large-scale production [122,123].
Enzymatic hydrolysis, on the other hand, is a method with lower energy requirements and high precision control of protein functionality, but is associated with costs related to the purchase of enzymes and requires longer processing time [102,124].
Technologies such as reverse osmosis (RO) and spray drying play a key role in recovering water, ingredient concentration, and the production of stable whey powders that can be used in further stages of food production. Reverse osmosis is one of the most sustainable methods for reducing water waste, while spray drying is a technology characterized by high production efficiency, although requiring relatively high energy consumption. Ohmic heating is a highly effective technology for processing WPC, WPI, and WPH whey proteins thanks to the rapid and uniform heating of the product. However, it requires higher investment costs, which may limit its use in smaller-scale production plants. Electroactivation and other lactose conversion processes enable the production of high-value products, such as galactooligosaccharides, lactitol, and lactosamine. However, these technologies remain niche, primarily due to the limited number of industrial implementations and the need for strict control of process parameters. Membrane technologies and integrated processing systems (e.g., ultrafiltration with reverse osmosis and spray drying) seem to be the most effective from a sustainability perspective and the most cost-effective approach for large-scale industrial applications. They enable water recovery, ingredient concentration, and waste reduction, making them the most sustainable technologies throughout the entire production cycle [125].
Unconventional technologies offer particular advantages in terms of product quality, although they require further research and optimization on an industrial scale. The use of ultrasound increases the permeation rate in the ultrafiltration process by minimizing the concentration of polarization and reducing membrane fouling [2,122,123,124,126,127,128,129,130,131].
This comparison highlights the typical trade-offs in whey processing—between operating costs, energy consumption, product quality, and scalability. Therefore, the choice of whey processing technology should be tailored both to the raw material parameters (e.g., sweet vs. acid whey) and the expected technological effect.

3.6. The Utilization of Whey for the Production of High-Quality Food Products

Whey is utilized in different ways across various countries, reflecting its nutritional value and versatility. It is used in animal nutrition, meat production, dairy production, dietary foods, and high-protein supplements, for the production of whey beverages, as a nutraceutical, as a source of potentially probiotic lactic acid bacteria, in biotechnology, for the production of whey protein preparations, as a standalone product, and for the fortification of food and pharmaceutical products [7]. The selected utilization methods are discussed below.

3.6.1. Whey Cheese Production

Whey is mainly used to produce whey cheeses, which are popular in many regions due to their unique taste and texture (Table 3). Some of them, due to their proven connection to the region’s history and culture, have been designated as Protected Designations of Origin (PDO) [132].
Table 3. Examples of whey cheeses, traditionally produced from milk whey, include those recognized under PDO/PGI status in the European Union.
Cheeses are made by heating whey to denature its proteins, resulting in products with high moisture content and pH levels that are susceptible to microbial growth and require appropriate preservation techniques. Each country utilizes whey in its own unique way, reflecting local traditions and culinary preferences [86,133,134,135].
Cheese whey can be processed into secondary products such as ricotta. This process also produces secondary biowaste from cheese whey, the disposal of which is prohibited using traditional methods in the EU. The use of waste whey as animal feed is currently not recommended and not practiced due to its high lactose content and the potential acidification of waste whey [136].

3.6.2. The Use of Whey in Meat Preparation

Acid whey (AW) [137] is a source of whey proteins and lactic acid bacteria (LAB), with antimicrobial and antioxidant properties. Using whey to prepare meat may help to reduce the amount of preservatives added to food and extend the shelf life of various types of meat. Probiotic bacteria can be used as starter cultures in meat marinades. Marinating meat in whey inhibits oxidation processes and improves its color stability after heat treatment, physicochemical properties (tenderness, juiciness), and the taste of meat products, as indicated by numerous studies [138,139,140,141,142,143,144,145]. The quality of meat marinated in acidic whey depends on the duration of the process. The optimal time is 24–72 h; extending or shortening this time negatively affects the palatability of various types of meat, or does not affect its quality [137,141,145,146]. According to the authors, the effectiveness of acid whey in tenderizing meat is greater in muscles with a high content of connective tissue. Proteolysis by meat proteases (calpains and cathepsins) and endopeptidases derived from acid whey may affect its water-binding capacity. The action of lactic acid bacteria in meat results in better colonization and activation of the enzymatic mechanisms of lactic acid bacteria, including proteases [147]. Marinated meat contained more peptides and a small amount of biogenic amines due to the presence of Lactobacillus bacteria in whey, which have a proven ability to produce amine oxidase enzymes and degrade biogenic amines [148].

3.6.3. The Valorization of Whey in the Production of Functional Beverages

Whey is recognized as a versatile and sustainable raw material for beverage production due to its unique nutritional composition, functional properties, and technological potential. As a by-product of cheese manufacture, whey contains lactose, whey proteins, minerals, vitamins, bioactive peptides, branched-chain amino acids (BCAA), low-fat content, and a relatively neutral flavor. These make whey an attractive ingredient in the beverage sector, and an ideal matrix for formulating various types of beverages, including fermented, non-fermented, functional, and protein-enriched drinks. Whey and whey components have been used commercially to produce whey-based beverages, regular and supplemented fruit juices, milk or milk permeate, as well as nutraceutical compounds and/or probiotics/prebiotics, for example, naturally carbonated whey-based probiotic beverages [54,85,112,149,150,151].
Whey kefirs are produced from kefir grains containing LAB and yeasts (Lactobacillus kefiri, Kluyveromyces marxianus). They are characterized by a slightly acidic flavor, mild effervescence, and probiotic activity [152].
Similarly, Saha et al. [153] demonstrated the effective use of chhana whey in fermented beverages prepared with Streptococcus thermophilus (NCDC-74) and yogurt (TC-470) cultures. Furthermore, Rizzolo & Cortellino [154] developed a whey-based beverage combining ricotta cheese whey with fruit juice, highlighting whey’s potential as a functional ingredient. On the other hand, whey–fruit beverages, in which whey is blended with fruit juices (e.g., orange, apple, or berry juices), are creating refreshing drinks with improved flavor, nutritional value, and antioxidant potential [155,156]. Meanwhile, whey–cereal beverages—in which whey is combined with barley, oats, or rice extracts to provide a natural source of dietary fiber, β-glucans, and prebiotic compounds—are valued for their probiotic potential and ability to support gut health [157,158,159].
Fermented whey drinks are considered functional beverages, as they often contain beneficial bacteria, including probiotic strains that can improve intestinal microbiota balance, enhance immune function, and contribute to overall well-being [159]. The use of innovative, beneficial bacterial strains in the production of whey beverages is both practically and commercially promising, as it enables the closure of the raw material cycle, creates valuable functional products, and crosses into the “health-promoting” beverage segment. However, the key is a combination of factors, which include strain selection (good matrix compatibility), cell protection technology (microencapsulation/stabilizing formats), and validation of health benefits. Only a limited number of health claim applications have been approved under the current food law. Adapting the law to the activities of food producers, along with creating a reliable database of the probiotic properties of specific microorganism strains and the technological requirements that enable these effects to be maintained throughout the product’s shelf life, poses a significant challenge [160]. On the other hand, basic guidelines on probiotics have been established by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the Codex Alimentarius. In the United States, probiotics are primarily regulated by the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In UE the EFSA/Regulation (EC) 1924/2006 [161] framework established rules for nutrition and health claims on food products in the EU, which are based on scientific evidence and must not be misleading. Taking into account existing regulations and FAO/WHO probiotic guidelines, it can be assessed that there are no clear regulations regarding the declaration of the probiotic effects of a food product containing beneficial microorganisms [161,162]. Therefore, the use of probiotics as starter cultures to produce whey beverages that provide health benefits is not widely adopted in the industry and is currently limited to the scientific sphere.
Non-fermented whey beverages are typically formulated by flavoring or fortifying clarified whey with natural ingredients such as fruit juices, plant extracts, or dietary fibers. These products maintain the nutritional value of whey [163]. Functional whey beverages enriched with amino acids, vitamins, and plant-derived ingredients provide nutritionally balanced solutions [164,165]. A recent innovation in the formulation of whey-based beverages involves the incorporation of superfood ingredients such as chia seeds, matcha, and turmeric, which enhance both the nutritional profile and consumer appeal of these products. To obtain a smooth, creamy texture without relying on artificial stabilizers, natural hydrocolloids such as guar gum and xanthan gum are commonly used [109,166,167].
In summary, recent advances in product formulation have enabled the development of a wide range of whey-based beverages, including protein shakes, smoothies, and fermented drinks. Combining whey with fruit juices, plant extracts, or natural flavors creates new market opportunities and attracts consumers seeking alternatives to traditional dairy beverages. Whey is increasingly being used in the development of functional foods and beverages, including sports drinks and fermented beverages.

3.6.4. Other Usage of Whey

The reason for the continuous development of whey processing is the pursuit of sustainability. Cheese whey and whey permeate are increasingly utilized as substrates for energy production due to their high organic content. The main applications include bioethanol, biogas, and microbial fuel cells production [168,169,170]. Utilizing whey to produce biofuels, biohydrogen, bioplastics, bioethanol, single-purpose proteins, and other value-added products addresses environmental concerns associated with whey disposal and promotes sustainable biorefining practices [99].
Whey cream has gained popularity due to its various applications in the food industry, including butter processing, as well as in cosmetics, owing to its high protein and nutrient content, making it a valuable ingredient [171,172]. Whey protein may also be an alternative to iron fortification in foods and supplements. Research indicates that whey protein can effectively chelate iron, improving its absorption and stability in various formulations. Peptides released during alcalase-mediated hydrolysis of whey proteins under optimal conditions exhibit potent iron-chelating properties. The chelation efficiency, under optimal conditions, is approximately 77.38% effective. Peptide-iron complexes derived from whey are potentially new functional ingredients that can be used as a carrier of bioavailable iron [104,173].
Edible Whey Films
Edible whey films are an innovative food packaging solution, providing a sustainable alternative to traditional synthetic materials. They can be made from whey protein isolates (WPI) and whey protein concentrates (WPC). New WPI-based nanocomposites can be incorporated into multilayer film packaging. They are biodegradable, flexible (mechanical properties), and can be enriched with various additives to improve their functionality. The development and use of whey-based films stems from the need for environmentally friendly packaging solutions that maintain food quality and safety. These films are characterized by high water vapor permeability and excellent oxygen permeability (barrier properties), making them suitable for food packaging applications [28,107,109].
Furthermore, bioactive and antimicrobial whey proteins, such as lactoferrin, can be incorporated into edible films, creating functional packaging that can extend the shelf life of products. Lactoferrin is effective against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, yeasts, and viruses. Therefore, it can potentially be used in a wide array of food products [81]. The use of single-cell protein (SCP) derived from whey to produce edible films is a novel approach that enhances the circular economy by utilizing agricultural byproducts [107]. Various additives are used to improve properties such as water vapor permeability and antioxidant activity. Egg proteins enhance the thickness, dissolution time, and protein content of whey films, thereby improving the physical and chemical properties of the whey films. Chia seeds improve mechanical properties. Ginger essential oil enhances the antimicrobial properties of whey films, effectively inhibiting the growth of pathogens, such as Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus [96,174,175,176]. Antimicrobial coatings for cheese are made from whey protein–polysaccharide. Antifungal plastic films carrying Lactic acid bacteria fermented whey for the preservation of cheese slices [28,177,178,179].
Alternatives to Petroleum-Based Plastics
Other examples include polylactic acid (PLA) and polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA)—bio-based polymers that serve as environmentally friendly alternatives to petroleum-based plastics. PLA and PHA are produced through the anaerobic digestion of whey [98,111]. These types of biopolymers are used in packaging materials, disposable products, agricultural films, and even medical applications.
Whey-Derived Alcoholic Beverages
The lactose content of whey enables its fermentation into ethanol and subsequent distillation into whey-derived alcoholic beverages [180]. Researchers achieved a 2.56% v/v ethanol concentration by optimizing lactose concentration and fermentation time using the yeast Kluyveromyces marxianus. This process, conducted under low aerobic conditions (0.4 vvm), resulted in a quantified ethanol yield of 92.92% using the specified strain [181]. Moreover, acid whey is used as a substrate for the production of Lactiobionic acid by Pseudomonas taetrolens.
Biohydrogen and Biodiesel
Cheese whey fermentation utilizes microorganisms to convert organic substrates into hydrogen. It is an indirect technology that employs several types of bacteria (Clostridium and Enterobacter) to produce biohydrogen and volatile fatty acids (VFA) under anaerobic conditions, taking advantage of the high carbohydrate content in waste whey. The fermentation process typically occurs in two stages, during which lactate is first produced and then metabolized to hydrogen. Lactobacillus is the dominant genus in whey fermentation, primarily converting carbohydrates into lactate, which is then utilized by hydrogen-producing bacteria, such as Clostridium. However, this process is difficult to control and sensitive to substrate composition. This solution is promising as it enables the production of renewable H2, with significant potential for large-scale implementation compared to alternative biological processes due to the use of renewable substrates, process simplicity, and independence from light [182,183,184,185]. Studies have shown that VFAs can be used as a low-cost alternative carbon source that could be converted into lipids and then into biodiesel [51,186,187].
The conversion of whey into bioethanol, biogas, and biohydrogen is carried out under different conditions and leads to varying degrees of environmental pollution reduction, as indicated by COD values. The yields and operating conditions presented in Table 4 show that whey is indeed a viable substrate for bioethanol, biogas, and biohydrogen production. TEA and LCA data support the sustainability and economic potential of whey valorization. If managed well (especially with “gate-fee” credit), the process can be cost-competitive and reduce environmental impact. However, achieving high yields often requires careful control of fermentation parameters (temperature, pH, COD concentration), and the scale-up economics strongly depend on local conditions (whey disposal costs, energy prices, capital investment).
Table 4. Advantages and disadvantages of whey valorisation for the production of bioethanol, biogas, and biohydrogen.

3.7. Technological Problems with the Valorization of Whey

Problems related to the valorisation of whey include:
  • raw material variability;
  • process challenges depending on the type of whey (acid vs. sweet whey);
  • microbiological safety/quality;
  • economic aspects and scalability;
  • environmental/regulatory issues.
Milk whey poses a significant threat to the environment if disposed of untreated. These types of issues may be solved with innovative cavitation technologies and devices enabling the extraction of milk raw material from industrial wastewater and its processing for feed purposes. The most common issues related to processing milk whey are technological problems associated with raw material variability, isolating proteins from liquid, its quality, safety, and environmental concerns [192].
The main obstacles in retaining whey protein are the high variability in the composition and properties of whey-derived products. Based on the manufacturing process, whey can be separated into two categories: acidic cottage cheese whey (with a pH range of 4.35–4.41) and sweet rennet cheese whey (with a pH range of 6–7) [23]. In sweet whey, glycomacropeptide can be removed by whey separation before cheesemaking using microfiltration. On the contrary, valorization through membrane filtration of acid whey could be challenging. Acid whey can be treated by nanofiltration, diafiltration, reverse osmosis, and electrodialysis for demineralisation or lactose recovery. However, crystallization of lactose is mainly a drying and storage issue [2,53]. Processing highly acidic whey poses a challenge due to the significant complexity of acidic whey processing. Its deoxidation with alkaline reagents leads to the disruption of quality in processed products, such as changes in taste and possible chemical contamination [192].
In various forms of whey, such as concentrated, evaporated, or dried whey, there are additional concerns regarding the presence of spores, particularly those of Bacillus cereus, as well as heat-stable and dry-stable toxins and enzymes. Notably, spore-formers, particularly the Bacillus cereus group, can endure pasteurization, persist in whey processing lines, and become concentrated in evaporated or condensed whey and powders [193].
In acid whey, the main hazards involve the survival (rather than growth) of acid-tolerant pathogens, as well as issues related to post-process spoilage and biofilm formation [193]. The wide range of possibilities for using whey as a matrix for producing fermented and non-fermented beverages is associated with several technological challenges. Choosing the right technology is crucial to minimize any negative effects on the rheology of whey, including losses in bioactive compounds (such as peptides, organic acids, or other microbial metabolites), and maintain the sensory quality of final whey products.
Despite its significant potential, the production of whey beverages can encounter some technological barriers:
-
Microbiological stability—Whey provides an environment conducive to microbial growth, so when designing these types of beverages, it is essential to develop effective preservation methods, such as pasteurization, microfiltration, and the use of natural growth inhibitors.
-
The sensory quality of the developed whey beverages: The natural flavor and aroma of whey are not always accepted by consumers; therefore, the use of flavorings or fermentation processes to enhance organoleptic qualities is crucial. Fruit additives are particularly effective in this regard.
-
The high lactose content limits the consumer group, excluding those with intolerance. Enzymatic hydrolysis of the disaccharide lactose should be considered when planning and selecting production technologies.
-
Standardization of the final product—The wide variation in whey composition depending on the type of raw material, the seasonality of the milk, and the cheesemaking process makes it difficult to achieve a uniform final product. Technological costs associated with implementing new whey processing technologies (e.g., ultrafiltration, nanofiltration) are also significant, as they necessitate investments in modern production lines, which may be a barrier for smaller enterprises.
Paneer whey was added to the production of multigrain bread, leading to enhanced crust browning linked to the Maillard reaction, along with a higher total solid content. Milk and acid whey-containing samples presented higher crumb firmness, gumminess, chewiness, and resilience compared to the control, as observed by Paul et al. [194]. It is possible to enhance the nutritional value of bakery products by incorporating high-protein ingredients, such as whey protein. However, if the whey protein content exceeds 5%, a bitter taste is observed due to the presence of small peptides, ferulic acid, and tannins [195]. On the other hand, the beverage industry faces challenges in utilizing whey protein due to the development of off-flavors and bitter peptides [97]. Fancello et al. [11] also found that fermented beverages with second cheese whey were associated with rancid odor caused by free fatty acids, esters, and ketones from whey. Liu et al. [196] used LC-TOF-MS/MS analysis to identify and characterize tri-to nonapeptides as bitter peptides and suggested that ultrafiltration could be used to remove these bitter peptides. Although positive results for the effective removal of bitter peptides by ultrafiltration were obtained, they were very limited. An extensive study should be conducted to develop more economical and commercial techniques for removing bitter peptides from the product without altering its nutritional and functional properties [97].
Whey can be a source of heavy metals, which is another technological problem. According to de Aquino et al. [197], there was a significant variation in the levels of mercury (Hg) detected. The highest concentration observed was 9.41 ± 0.295 ng g−1, while the lowest level recorded was 0.548 ± 0.029 ng g−1. The concentrations were determined to be within the acceptable range for food products. However, there are currently no worldwide regulations regarding the presence of mercury contamination in dairy products.

4. Future Perspectives and Conclusions

Currently, in industrialized countries around the world, 70–90% of whey is processed for various purposes. However, the complete and rational use of whey has not yet been achieved worldwide. In many industries, residual whey, which constitutes the majority of the by-products, is discharged into the sewer system without adequate treatment, leading to substantial environmental degradation. This practice is primarily the result of a lack of advanced processing technologies, inadequate economic incentives, and the high cost of building processing plants [163].
On the other hand, the global whey protein market was estimated at USD 5.33 billion in 2021 and is expected to reach USD 14.32 billion by 2030, growing at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 10.48% between 2020 and 2030. The whey protein concentrate (WPC) segment accounted for the largest share of global revenues in 2021, exceeding 40.00%, while the whey-based sports nutrition segment reached 21.50%. Due to its versatile use in the food industry, global whey protein sales are expected to grow, as consumers continue to seek functional food products, including those addressing issues such as lack of appetite, protein-calorie malnutrition, and disease-related muscle loss. Demand will also be influenced by the development of fortified food products, edible films, cosmetics, and skin care sectors [74].
We used a SWOT analysis to identify the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats related to whey valorisation (Table 5).
Table 5. SWOT analysis of whey valorisation.
Failure to valorize whey by-products leads to significant economic, nutritional, and environmental losses. New directions for whey processing are still being sought, but some of the whey remains unused. Potential processing directions include using whey as a source of bioactive peptides, probiotics, organic acids, aromatic compounds, and enzymes, with potential applications for the production of value-added products through microbial fermentations. An increasing awareness of health and fitness has fueled a growing demand for protein-rich foods and other functional foods, further driving the development of this food segment.
A promising direction is the integration of whey processing into a circular economy, where waste is transformed into a valuable resource. These approaches not only reduce environmental burdens but also contribute to the sustainable development of the agro-industrial complex. Deep whey processing presents new opportunities for developing eco-friendly technologies across various industries, minimizing environmental risks, and creating new markets for highly profitable products. The rational use of whey is therefore a key factor in the innovative development of the dairy industry and the economy as a whole. Whey is now a key resource with enormous potential for innovation, sustainability, and economic growth through advanced processing and integration into the circular economy [51].
Progress in whey processing is promising, but challenges remain in optimizing its properties to enable its use on an industrial scale. The incorporation of whey into various sectors requires ongoing research and development to improve its functional properties and economic viability. Future research should focus on developing cost-effective strategies for membrane technology, standardization of whey composition, as well as the use of whey as a carrier of bioactive compounds for the development of functional foods.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, E.C.-S. and D.Z.; methodology, E.C.-S., M.P. and D.Z.; investigation, A.A.-K., J.R., A.G. and E.R.; resources, A.G., K.N.-S., K.K.-S., S.K.-P. and M.M.-W.; data curation, A.G., M.P., K.N.-S. and E.R.; writing—original draft preparation, E.C.-S., M.P., A.G., K.N.-S., S.K.-P. and M.M.-W.; writing—review and editing, E.C.-S., M.P., D.Z., J.R., K.N.-S. and A.A.-K.; visualization, K.N.-S., K.K.-S., S.K.-P., J.R. and A.A.-K.; supervision, E.C.-S. and D.Z.; project administration, D.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was financed by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Poland as part of the targeted subsidy “Research network of natural science universities for the development of the Polish dairy sector—research project” (SUP-RIM) (MEiN/2023/DPI/2866).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. CXS 289-1995; Standard for Whey Powders. International Food Standards. FAO, WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2022.
  2. Buchanan, D.; Martindale, W.; Romeih, E.; Hebishy, E. Recent advances in whey processing and valorisation: Technological and environmental perspectives. Int. J. Dairy Technol. 2023, 76, 291–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Rejdlová, A.; Lorencová, E.; Míšková, Z.; Salek, R.N. Techno-Functional Properties and Recent Advances in the Manufacturing of Whey Beverages: A Review. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 1846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Menchik, P.; Zuber, T.; Zuber, A.; Moraru, C.I. Short communication: Composition of coproduct streams from dairy processing: Acid whey and milk permeate. J. Dairy Sci. 2019, 102, 3978–3984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Lindsay, M.J.; Walker, T.W.; Dumesic, J.A.; Rankin, S.A.; Huber, G.W. Production of monosaccharides and whey protein from acid whey waste streams in the dairy industry. Green Chem. 2018, 20, 1824–1834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Pal, P.; Nayak, J. Development and analysis of a sustainable technology in manufacturing acetic acid and whey protein from waste cheese whey. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 59–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Ziarno, M. Kwaśna serwatka—Nowe kierunki wykorzystania i korzyści zdrowotne. Forum Mlecz. Bizn. 2024, 3, 56. [Google Scholar]
  8. Khattab, A.M.; Esmael, M.E.; Farrag, A.A.; Ibrahim, M.I.A. Structural assessment of the bioplastic (poly-3-hydroxybutyrate) produced by Bacillus flexus Azu-A2 through cheese whey valorization. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 190, 319–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Asunis, F.; De Gioannis, G.; Isipato, M.; Muntoni, A.; Polettini, A.; Pomi, R.; Rossi, A.; Spiga, D. Control of fermentation duration and pH to orient biochemicals and biofuels production from cheese whey. Bioresour. Technol. 2019, 289, 121722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Bhusari, A.A.; Mazumdar, B.; Rathid, A.P. Synthesis and characterization of biocatalyst prepared from dairy waste for lactic acid esterification. Int. J. Chem. React. Eng. 2021, 19, 939–948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Fancello, F.; Zara, G.; Hatami, F.; Scano, A.E.; Mannazzu, I. Unlocking the potential of second cheese whey: A comprehensive review on valorisation strategies. Rev. Environ. Sci. Bio/Technol. 2024, 23, 411–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ginger Santonja, G.; Panagiotis Raunkjær Stubdrup, K.K.; Brinkmann, T.; Roudier, S. Best Available Techniques (BAT) Reference Document for the Food, Drink and Milk Industries. Industrial Emissions Directive 2010/75/EU Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control, 2019, EUR 29978 EN, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2019. Available online: https://bureau-industrial-transformation.jrc.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2020-01/JRC118627_FDM_Bref_2019_published.pdf (accessed on 7 September 2025).
  13. Besediuk, V.; Yatskov, M.; Korchyk, N.; Kucherova, A.; Maletskyi, Z. Whey—From Waste to a Valuable Resource. J. Agric. Food Res. 2024, 18, 101280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Abish, Z.A.; Alibekov, R.S.; Tarapoulouzi, M.; Bakhtybekova, A.R.; Kobzhasarova, Z.I. Review in Deep Processing of Whey. Cogent Food Agric. 2024, 10, 2415380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Jiang, L.; Zhang, Z.; Qiu, C.; Wen, J. A Review of Whey Protein-Based Bioactive Delivery Systems: Design, Fabrication, and Application. Foods 2024, 13, 2453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Sustainable Development Goals 2030. UNDP. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/goals (accessed on 10 November 2025).
  17. Mukherjee, P.; Raj, N.; Sivaprakasam, S. Harnessing Valorization Potential of Whey Permeate for D-Lactic Acid Production Using Lactic Acid Bacteria. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2023, 13, 15639–15658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Pires, A.F.; Marnotes, N.G.; Rubio, O.D.; Garcia, A.C.; Pereira, C.D. Dairy By-Products: A Review on the Valorization of Whey and Second Cheese Whey. Foods 2021, 10, 1067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Pandey, S.; Dumont, M.J.; Orsat, V. Comparative Kinetic Study for the Conversion of Lactose and Whey Permeate Powder into 5-Hydroxymethylfurfural. In Proceedings of the 2021 ASABE Annual International Virtual Meeting, Virtual, 12–16 July 2021; American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers: St. Joseph, MI, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Urtasun, N.; Baieli, M.F.; Hirsch, D.B.; Miranda, M.V.; Cascone, O.; Wolman, F.J. Challenges in Dairy Whey Protein Purification. In Handbook on Protein Purification: Industry Challenges and Technological Developments; Nova Science Publishers: Hauppauge, NY, USA, 2022; pp. 1–18. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/11336/162658 (accessed on 5 November 2025).
  21. Ergasheva, Z.K.; Sultanov, S.A.; Saparov, J.E. Analysis of Dairy Whey Food Functional Modules Based on Resource-Saving Technologies. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2023; Volume 1231, p. 012042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. José, N.V.; Orantes, L.A.C.; Gómez-Cruz, L.A.; Vela-Gutiérrez, G. Use of Whey: A Sustainable Alternative for the Cheese Industry. In Integration of Sustainable Development Goals in Water Resource Management and Agricultural Food Production; Apple Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 2025; pp. 65–81. [Google Scholar]
  23. Rocha-Mendoza, D.; Kosmerl, E.; Krentz, A.; Zhang, L.; Badiger, S.; Miyagusuku-Cruzado, G.; Mayta-Apaza, A.; Giusti, M.; Jiménez-Flores, R.; García-Cano, I. Invited review: Acid whey trends and health benefits. J. Dairy Sci. 2021, 104, 1262–1275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Eurostat Milk and Milk Product Statistics—Statistics Explained—Eurostat. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Milk_and_milk_product_statistics (accessed on 14 October 2025).
  25. Macwan, S.R.; Dabhi, B.K.; Parmar, S.C.; Aparnathi, K.D. Whey and Its Utilization. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Appl. Sci. 2016, 5, 134–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Eurostat Key Figures on the European Food Chain—2024 Edition. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/15216629/20555393/KS-01-24-000-EN-N.pdf (accessed on 15 October 2025).
  27. National Agricultural Statistics Service Dairy Products—2024 Summary. Available online: https://esmis.nal.usda.gov/sites/default/release-files/jm214p131/r781zd41r/4b29d481c/daryan25.pdf (accessed on 15 October 2025).
  28. Lappa, I.K.; Papadaki, A.; Kachrimanidou, V.; Terpou, A.; Koulougliotis, D.; Eriotou, E.; Kopsahelis, N. Cheese Whey Processing: Integrated Biorefinery Concepts and Emerging Food Applications. Foods 2019, 8, 347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Pescuma, M.; Hébert, E.M.; de Valdez, G.F.; Mozzi, F. Functional Fermented Whey Foods: Their Role in Human Health. In Beneficial Microbes in Fermented and Functional Foods; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2014; pp. 114–131. [Google Scholar]
  30. Rajarajan, G.; Irshad, A.; Raghunath, B.V.; Mahesh Kumar, G.; Punnagaiarasi, A. Utilization of Cheese Industry Whey for Biofuel–Ethanol Production. In Environmental Science and Engineering (Subseries: Environmental Science); Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 59–64. [Google Scholar]
  31. Uribe-Velázquez, T.; Díaz-Vázquez, D.; Barajas-Álvarez, P.; González-López, M.E.; Gradilla-Hernández, M.S.; García-Amezquita, L.E.; Carrillo-Nieves, D.; García-Cayuela, T. From Waste to Value: Mitigating the Environmental Impact of Whey in Jalisco, Mexico. J. Clean. Prod. 2025, 501, 145334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Sirmacekic, E.; Atilgan, A.; Rolbiecki, R.; Jagosz, B.; Rolbiecki, S.; Gokdogan, O.; Niemiec, M.; Kocięcka, J. Possibilities of Using Whey Wastes in Agriculture: Case of Turkey. Energies 2022, 15, 9636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Verma, D.K.; Patel, A.R.; Tripathy, S.; Gupta, A.K.; Singh, S.; Shah, N.; Utama, G.L.; Chávez-González, M.L.; Zongo, K.; Banwo, K.; et al. Processing and Formulation Technology of Nutritional and Functional Food Products by Utilizing Cheese and/or Paneer Whey: A Critical Review. J. King Saud Univ.-Sci. 2024, 36, 103508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Mutio, C.; Okello, D.; Karanja, S.; Bebe, B.; Bolwig, S. Circular Business Models for Whey Valorization in the Kenyan Dairy Sector through Product Life Extension and Resource Recovery. Discov. Sustain. 2025, 6, 805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Arshad, U.E.T.; Hassan, A.; Ahmad, T.; Naeem, M.; Chaudhary, M.T.; Abbas, S.Q.; Randhawa, M.; Colombo Pimentel, T.; da Cruz, A.G.; Aadil, R.M. A recent glance on the valorisation of cheese whey for industrial prerogative: High-value-added products development and integrated reutilising strategies. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2023, 58, 2001–2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Ramos, G.L.D.P.A.; Guimarães, J.T.; Pimentel, T.C.; da Cruz, A.G.; de Souza, S.L.Q.; Vendramel, S.M.R. Whey: Generation, Recovery, and Use of a Relevant by-Product. In Valorization of Agri-Food Wastes and By-Products: Recent Trends, Innovations and Sustainability Challenges; Bhat, R., Ed.; Academic Press: Tartu, Estonia, 2021; pp. 391–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Panagopoulos, V.; Dima, A.; Boura, K.; Bosnea, L.; Nigam, P.S.; Kanellaki, M.; Koutinas, A.A. Cell Factory Models of Non-Engineered S. Cerevisiae Containing Lactase in a Second Layer for Lactose Fermentation in One Batch. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 2021, 145, 109750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Xia, J.; He, J.; Xu, J.; Liu, X.; Qiu, Z.; Xu, N.; Su, L. Direct conversion of cheese whey to polymalic acid by mixed culture of Aureobasidium pullulans and permeabilized Kluyveromyces marxianus. Bioresour. Technol. 2021, 337, 125443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Sebastián-Nicolás, J.L.; González-Olivares, L.G.; Vázquez-Rodríguez, G.A.; Lucho-Constatino, C.A.; Castañeda-Ovando, A. Valorization of whey using a biorefinery. Biofuels Bioprod. Bioref. 2020, 14, 1010–1027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Directive 2006/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2006 on Waste (Text with EEA Relevance). OJ L 114, 27.4.2006, pp. 9–21. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2006/12/oj/eng (accessed on 5 September 2025).
  41. Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 Concerning Urban Waste-Water Treatment (91/271/EEC). OJ L 135, 30.5.1991, pp. 40–52. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1991/271/oj/eng (accessed on 5 September 2025).
  42. Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the Landfill of Waste. OJ L 182, 16.7.1999, pp. 1–19. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1999/31/oj/eng (accessed on 5 September 2025).
  43. Giulianetti de Almeida, M.P.; Mockaitis, G.; Weissbrodt, D.G. Got Whey? Sustainability Endpoints for the Dairy Industry through Resource Biorecovery. Fermentation 2023, 9, 897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Najlepsze Dostępne Techniki (BAT) Wytyczne dla Branży Mleczarskiej; Narodowy Fundusz Ochrony Środowiska i Gospodarki Wodnej, Ministerstwo Środowiska: Warszawa, Poland, 2005. (In Polish)
  45. Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on Waste and Repealing Certain Directives (Text with EEA Relevance). Document 02008L0098-20251016. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2008/98 (accessed on 5 November 2025).
  46. Zandona, E.; Blažić, M.; Režek Jambrak, A. Whey Utilization: Sustainable Uses and Environmental Approach. Food Technol. Biotechnol. 2021, 59, 147–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. González-García, S.; Hospido, A.; Moreira, M.T.; Feijoo, G.; Arroja, L. Environmental life cycle assessment of a Galician cheese: San Simon da Costa. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 52, 253–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Finnegan, W.; Yan, M.; Holden, N.M.; Goggins, J. A review of environmental life cycle assessment studies examining cheese production. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2018, 23, 1773–1787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Ladha-Sabur, A.; Bakalis, S.; Fryer, P.J.; Lopez-Quiroga, E. Mapping energy consumption in food manufacturing. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 86, 270–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Price, J. History of the development and application of whey protein products. In Whey Proteins; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2019; pp. 51–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Goyal, C.; Dhyani, P.; Rai, D.C.; Tyagi, S.; Dhull, S.B.; Sadh, P.K.; Duhan, J.S.; Saharan, B.S. Emerging trends and advancements in the processing of dairy whey for sustainable biorefining. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2023, 1, 6626513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ayed, L.; M’hir, S.; Asses, N. Sustainable whey processing techniques: Innovations in derivative and beverage production. Food Biosci. 2023, 53, 102642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Paladii, I.V.; Vrabie, E.G.; Sprinchan, K.G.; Bologa, M.K. Whey: Review. Part 2. Treatment Processes and Methods. Surf. Eng. Appl. Electrochem. 2021, 57, 651–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Malos, I.G.; Ghizdareanu, A.-I.; Vidu, L.; Matei, C.B.; Pasarin, D. The Role of Whey in Functional Microorganism Growth and Metabolite Generation: A Biotechnological Perspective. Foods 2025, 14, 1488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Yeluri Jonnala, B.R.; McSweeney, P.L.H.; Sheehan, J.J.; Cotter, P.D. Whey microbiota and their significance in dairy processing. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 1942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Zhubanova, A.; Abdieva, G.; Ualieva, P.; Akimbekov, N.; Malik, A.; Tastambek, K. Whey-to-bioethanol valorisation: Fermentation with immobilised yeast cells. Eng. Sci. 2024, 27, 995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Ohstrom, A.M.; Buck, A.E.; Du, X.; Wee, J. Evaluation of Kluyveromyces spp. for conversion of lactose in different types of whey from dairy processing waste into ethanol. Front. Microbiol. 2023, 14, 1208284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Anumudu, C.K.; Miri, T.; Onyeaka, H. Multifunctional Applications of Lactic Acid Bacteria: Enhancing Safety, Quality, and Nutritional Value in Foods and Fermented Beverages. Foods 2024, 13, 3714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Del Toro-Barbosa, M.; Uribe-Velázquez, T.; Hurtado-Romero, A.; Rosales-De la Cruz, M.F.; Carrillo-Nieves, D.; Garcia-Amezquita, L.E.; García-Cayuela, T. Evaluation of GABA-Producing Fermented Whey Formulations: From Strain Selection to Raspberry-Enriched Beverages with Psychobiotic Potential. Foods 2025, 14, 2762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Delgado-Macuil, R.J.; Perez-Armendariz, B.; Cardoso-Ugarte, G.A.; Tolibia, S.E.M.; Benítez-Rojas, A.C. Recent Biotechnological Applications of Whey: Review and Perspectives. Fermentation 2025, 11, 217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Marco, M.L.; Heeney, D.; Binda, S.; Cifelli, C.J.; Cotter, P.D.; Foligne, B.; Ganzle, M.; Kort, R.; Pasin, G.; Pihlanto, A.; et al. Health benefits of fermented foods: Microbiota and beyond. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2017, 44, 94–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Zheng, X.; Shi, X.; Wang, B. A Review on the General Cheese Processing Technology, Flavor Biochemical Pathways, and the Influence of Yeasts in Cheese. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 703284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Saubenova, M.; Oleinikova, Y.; Rapoport, A.; Maksimovich, S.; Yermekbay, Z.; Khamedova, E. Bioactive Peptides Derived from Whey Proteins for Health and Functional Beverages. Fermentation 2024, 10, 359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Gao, Y.; Gao, L.; Kang, Y.; Yang, G.; Zhao, Z.; Zhao, Y.; Li, S. Non-Targeted Metabolomics Analysis Reveals Metabolite Profiles Change During Whey Fermentation with Kluyveromyces marxianus. Metabolites 2024, 14, 694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Conde-Báez, L.; Pineda-Muñoz, C.F.; Conde-Mejía, C.; Mas-Hernández, E.; López-Molina, A. Conversion of Sweet Whey to Bioethanol: A Bioremediation Alternative for Dairy Industry. Biomass 2024, 4, 507–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Chandrapala, J.; Duke, M.C.; Gray, S.R.; Zisu, B.; Weeks, M.; Palmer, M.; Vasiljevic, T. Properties of acid whey as a function of pH and temperature. J. Dairy Sci. 2015, 98, 4352–4363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Asunis, F.; De Gioannis, G.; Dessì, P.; Isipato, M.; Lens, P.N.; Muntoni, A.; Spiga, D. The dairy biorefinery: Integrating treatment processes for cheese whey valorisation. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 276, 111240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Praveen, M.; Brogi, S. Microbial Fermentation in Food and Beverage Industries: Innovations, Challenges, and Opportunities. Foods 2025, 14, 114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Benitez, R.; Ortero, G. (Eds.) Whey: Types, Composition and Health Implications; Nova Science Publishers Inc.: Hauppauge, NY, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  70. Yang, S.Y.; Yoon, K.S. Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment of Listeria monocytogenes and Enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli in Yogurt. Foods 2022, 11, 971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Guanhong, C.; Zonghong, L.; Yao, Z.; Xu, X.; Ting, Z.; Xin, W. Effect and mechanism of eliminating Staphylococcus aureus by electron beam irradiation and reducing the toxicity of its metabolites. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2023, 89, e02075-22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Briega, I.; Garde, S.; Sánchez, C.; Rodríguez-Mínguez, E.; Picon, A.; Ávila, M. Evaluation of Biofilm Production and Antibiotic Resistance/Susceptibility Profiles of Pseudomonas spp. Isolated from Milk and Dairy Products. Foods 2025, 14, 1105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Sumny, E.H.; Kempka, A.P. Bioactive whey peptides: A bibliometric and functional overview. Discov. Food 2025, 5, 138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Whey Protein Market (2022–2030); Grand View Research, Inc.: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2025; Available online: https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/whey-protein-market (accessed on 5 September 2025).
  75. Global Market Insights. Whey Protein Market Size, Share & Trends Report, 2024–2032; Global Market Insights Inc.: Selbyville, DE, USA, 2024; Available online: https://www.gminsights.com/industry-analysis/whey-protein-ingredients-market (accessed on 3 November 2025).
  76. Ramos, O.L.; Pereira, R.N.; Rodrigues, R.M.; Teixeira, J.A.; Vicente, A.A.; Malcata, F.X. Whey and Whey Powders: Production and Uses. In Encyclopedia of Food and Health; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016; pp. 498–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Allied Market Research. Whey Protein Market by Type (WPC, WPI, WPH): Global Opportunity Analysis and Industry Forecast, 2023–2032. Allied Analytics LLP: Pune, India, 2023. Available online: https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/press-release/whey-protein-ingredients-market.html (accessed on 5 November 2025).
  78. G Whey Protein Ingredients Market Size—By Type (Whey Protein Concentrate, Whey Protein Isolate, Hydrolyzed Whey Protein), By Application (Bakery & Confectionery, Dairy Product, Sports Nutrition, Meat Product, Health Supplements) & Forecast 2023–2032; Global Market Insight (GMI), 2023. Report ID: GMI6313. Available online: https://www.gminsights.com/industry-analysis/whey-protein-ingredients-market (accessed on 3 October 2025).
  79. Euromonitor International. Dairy Proteins: Global Trends and Consumer Insights; Euromonitor International Ltd.: London, UK, 2023; Available online: https://www.euromonitor.com/article/the-key-trends-shaping-dairy-products-and-alternatives-into-2025 (accessed on 5 November 2025).
  80. Tahir, I.; Foley, C.; Floreani, R. Whey Protein Isolate and β-Lactoglobulin-Modified Alginate Hydrogel Scaffolds Enhance Cell Proliferation for Cultivated Meat Applications. Foods 2025, 14, 2534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Dinika, I.; Verma, D.K.; Balia, R.; Utama, G.L.; Patel, A.R. Potential of cheese whey bioactive proteins and peptides in the development of antimicrobial edible film composite: A review of recent trends. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 103, 57–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Mehra, R.; Kumar, H.; Kumar, N.; Ranvir, S.; Jana, A.; Buttar, H.S.; Telessy, I.G.; Awuchi, C.G.; Okpala, C.O.R.; Korzeniowska, M.; et al. Whey proteins processing and emergent derivatives: An insight perspective from constituents, bioactivities, functionalities to therapeutic applications. J. Funct. Foods 2021, 87, 104760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Soumati, B.; Atmani, M.; Benabderrahmane, A.; Benjelloun, M. Whey Valorization- Innovative Strategies for Sustainable Development and Value-Added Product Creation. J. Ecol. Eng. 2023, 24, 86–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Whey Protein Isolate (WPI) Standard v4.0 Effective 07/04/2023. American Dairy Products Institute (ADPI). Available online: https://adpi.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/WPI-Standard-v4.0_2023.pdf (accessed on 5 November 2025).
  85. Bandara, T.A.; Munasinghe-Arachchige, S.P.; Gamlath, C.J. Fermented whey beverages: A review of process fundamentals, recent developments and nutritional potential. Int. J. Dairy Technol. 2023, 76, 737–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Bintsis, T.; Papademas, P. Sustainable approaches in whey cheese production: A review. Dairy 2023, 4, 249–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Papademas, P.; Kotsaki, P. Technological Utilization of Whey towards Sustainable Exploitation. J. Adv. Dairy Res. 2020, 7, 231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Reig, M.; Vecino, X.; Cortina, J.L. Use of Membrane Technologies in Dairy Industry: An Overview. Foods 2021, 10, 2768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Di Filippo, G.; Melchior, S.; Plazzotta, S.; Calligaris, S.; Innocente, N. Effect of enzymatic hydrolysis with Alcalase or Protamex on technological and antioxidant properties of whey protein hydrolysates. Food Res. Int. 2024, 188, 114499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Chang, Y.B.; Kim, H.; Lee, S.K.; Kim, H.-J.; Jeong, A.-H.; Suh, H.J.; Ahn, Y. Characteristics and Absorption Rate of Whey Protein Hydrolysates Prepared Using Flavourzyme after Treatment with Alcalase and Protamex. Molecules 2023, 28, 7969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Lans, A.M.; Frelka, J.C.; Paluri, S.; Vodovotz, Y. Physical properties and sensory analysis of galacto-oligosaccharide glassy confections. LWT 2018, 96, 499–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Hansen, M.M.; Hartel, R.W.; Roos, Y.H. Bioactives and extracts affect the physico-chemical properties of concentrated whey protein isolate dispersions. Food Prod. Process. Nutr. 2022, 4, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Czelej, M.; Garbacz, K.; Czernecki, T.; Rachwał, K.; Wawrzykowski, J.; Waśko, A. Whey Protein Enzymatic Breakdown: Synthesis, Analysis, and Discovery of New Biologically Active Peptides in Papain-Derived Hydrolysates. Molecules 2025, 30, 1451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Julmohammad, N.; Roslan, J.; Mohd Razali, U.H.; Chin, S.Y. Physicochemical properties and radical-scavenging activity of whey protein hydrolysate by conjugation with lactose. Food Res. 2024, 8, 62–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Yu, P.; Yan, J.; Kong, L.; Yu, J.; Zhao, X.; Peng, X. Whey Protein Hydrolysate Improved the Structure and Function of Myofibrillar Protein in Ground Pork during Repeated Freeze–Thaw Cycles. Foods 2023, 12, 3135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Alvarez-Perez, O.B.; Ventura-Sobrevilla, J.M.; Torres-León, C.; Rojas-Molina, R.; Rodríguez-Herrera, R.; Aguilar-González, M.A.; Aguilar, C.N. Development and characterization of whey protein films incorporated with tarbush polyphenols and candelilla wax. Food Biosci. 2022, 45, 101505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Kheto, A.; Adhikary, U.; Dhua, S.; Sarkar, A.; Kumar, Y.; Vashishth, R.; Shrestha, B.B.; Saxena, D.C. A review on advancements in emerging processing of whey protein: Enhancing functional and nutritional properties for functional food applications. Food Saf. Health 2025, 3, 23–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Boey, J.Y.; Mohamad, L.; Khok, Y.S.; Tay, G.S.; Baidurah, S. A Review of the Applications and Biodegradation of Polyhydroxyalkanoates and Poly (lactic acid) and Its Composites. Polymers 2021, 13, 1544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Deshmukh, N.; Singh Rao, P.; Sharma, H.; Kumar, S.M.H.; Laxmana Naik, N.; Manoj Kumar, C.T. Waste to nutrition: The evolution of whey, a byproduct to galactooligosaccharides production. Food Chem. Adv. 2024, 4, 100642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Zhou, X.; Hua, X.; Huang, L.; Xu, Y. Bioutilization of cheese manufacturing wastes (cheese whey powder) for bioethanol and specific product (galactonic acid) production via a two-step bioprocess. Bioresour. Technol. 2019, 272, 70–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Mei, L.; Fu, Q.; Guo, T.; Ji, Q.; Zhou, Y. Structural changes and cholesterol-lowering in denatured whey protein isolate: Malic acid combined enzymolysis. Food Hydrocoll. 2022, 127, 107502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Irazoqui, J.M.; Santiago, G.M.; Mainez, M.E.; Amadio, A.F.; Eberhardt, M.F. Enzymes for production of whey protein hydrolysates and other value-added products. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2024, 108, 354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Bolla, M.; Pettinato, M.; Ferrari, P.F.; Fabiano, B.; Perego, P. Polyhydroxyalkanoates production from laboratory to industrial scale: A review. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2025, 310, 143255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Wu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Ma, Z.; Mu, G.; Qian, F. Novel insights into whey protein peptide-iron chelating agents: Structural characterization, in vitro stability, and functional properties. Food Biosci. 2024, 60, 104317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Fara, A.; Sabater, C.; Palacios, J.; Requena, T.; Montilla, A.; Zárate, G. Prebiotic galactooligosaccharides production from lactose and lactulose by Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. Bulgaricus CRL 450. Food Funct. 2020, 11, 5875–5886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Kiran, S.; Sreeja, V.; Kumari Patel, H. The prebiotic potential of lactulose: A review. J. Phytopharm. 2023, 12, 425–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Kandasamy, S.; Yoo, J.; Yun, J.; Kang, H.-B.; Seol, K.-H.; Kim, H.-W.; Ham, J.-S. Application of Whey Protein-Based Edible Films and Coatings in Food Industries: An Updated Overview. Coatings 2021, 11, 1056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Khin, M.N.; Ahammed, S.; Kamal, M.M.; Saqib, M.N.; Liu, F.; Zhong, F. Investigating next-generation edible packaging: Protein-based films and coatings for delivering active compounds. Food Hydrocoll. Health 2024, 6, 100182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Pires, A.F.; Díaz, O.; Cobos, A.; Pereira, C.D. A Review of Recent Developments in Edible Films and Coatings-Focus on Whey-Based Materials. Foods 2024, 13, 2638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Koukoumaki, D.I.; Papanikolaou, S.; Ioannou, Z.; Gkatzionis, K.; Sarris, D. The Development of Novel Edible Films from Single-Cell Protein Produced by the Biotechnological Valorization of Cheese Whey. Appl. Microbiol. 2024, 4, 1030–1041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Sarkar, S.; Gupta, S.; Shaw, A.K. Emerging Technology and Management Trends in Environment and Sustainability: Proceedings of the International Conference, EMTES-2022; Taylor & Francis: Abingdon, UK, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  112. Kumar, N.; Heena; Dixit, A.; Mehra, M.; Daniloski, D.; Trajkovska Petkoska, A. Utilization of whey: Sustainable trends and future developments. In Whey Valorization: Innovations, Technological Advancements and Sustainable Exploitation; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2023; pp. 47–62. [Google Scholar]
  113. Królczyk, J.B.; Dawidziuk, T.; Janiszewska-Turak, E.; Sołowiej, B. Use of Whey and Whey Preparations in the Food Industry—A Review. Pol. J. Food Nutr. Sci. 2016, 66, 157–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Babenyshev, S.P.; Zhidkov, V.E.; Mamay, D.S.; Utkin, V.P.; Shapakov, N.A. Ultrafiltration of Modified Milk Whey. Food Raw Mater. 2016, 4, 101–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Ferreira, M.V.S.; Cappato, L.P.; Silva, R.; Rocha, R.S.; Guimarães, J.T.; Balthazar, C.F.; Esmerino, E.A.; Freitas, M.Q.; Rodrigues, F.N.; Granato, D.; et al. Ohmic heating for processing of whey-raspberry flavored beverage. Food Chem. 2019, 297, 125018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Sathya, R.; Singh, A.; Rasane, P.; Poonia, A.; Singh, J.; Kaur, S.; Gunjal, M.; Kaur, J.; Bhadariya, V. Recent Trends in Membrane Processing of Whey. In Whey Valorization; Poonia, A., Trajkovska Petjoska, A., Eds.; Springer Natura Pte Ltd.: Singapore, 2023; Chapter 16; pp. 323–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Chen, Q.; Zhao, L.; Yao, L.; Chen, Q.; Ahmad, W.; Li, Y.; Qin, Z. The Application of Membrane Separation Technology in the Dairy Industry. In Technological Approaches for Novel Applications in Dairy Processing; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2018; p. 23. [Google Scholar]
  118. Argenta, A.B.; Scheer, A.D.P. Membrane Separation Processes Applied to Whey: A review. Food Rev. Int. 2019, 36, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Tavares, T.G.; Malcata, F.X. Whey proteins as a source of bioactive peptides against hypertension. In Bioactive Food Peptides in Health and Disease; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2013; p. 75. [Google Scholar]
  120. Tolkach, A.; Kulozik, U. Fractionation of whey proteins and caseinomacropeptide by means of enzymatic crosslinking and membrane separation techniques. J. Food Eng. 2005, 67, 13–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Cassano, A.; Conidi, C.; Castro-Muñoz, R. Current and Future Applications of Nanofiltration in Food Processing. In Separation of Functional Molecules in Food by Membrane Technology; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 305–348. [Google Scholar]
  122. Abdulstar, A.R.; Altemimi, A.B.; Al-Hilphy, A.R. Exploring the power of thermosonication: A comprehensive review of its applications and impact in the food industry. Foods 2023, 12, 1459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Selmi, H.; Presutto, E.; Spano, G.; Capozzi, V.; Fragasso, M. Valorising Whey: From Environmental Burden to Bio-Based Production of Value-Added Compounds and Food Ingredients. Foods 2025, 14, 3646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Zheng, Y.; Yang, F.; Yuan, X.; Ji, Y.; Li, H.; Li, H.; Yu, J.; Zulewska, J. Enzymatic hydrolysis of whey proteins by the combination of Alcalase and Neutrase: Kinetic model and hydrolysis control. Int. Dairy J. 2024, 151, 105867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Brião, V.B.; Mossmann, J.; Seguenka, B.; Graciola, S.; Piccin, J.S. Integrating whey processing: Ultrafiltration, nanofiltration, and water reuse from diafiltration. Membranes 2024, 14, 191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  126. Chen, G.Q.; Qu, Y.; Gras, S.L.; Kentish, S.E. Separation technologies for whey protein fractionation. Food Eng. Rev. 2023, 15, 438–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. dos Santos, I.F.; Pimentel, T.C.; da Cruz, A.G.; Stringheta, P.C.; Martins, E.; Campelo, P.H. Ohmic Heating in Food Processing: An Overview of Plant-Based Protein Modification. Processes 2024, 12, 1800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Hasan, R.; Islam, M.; Jobair, A.B.; Afrin, S.; Islam, N.; Begum, R. A Comparative Quality Evaluation of Whey Powder Using Spray and Freeze Drying Methods. J. Food Qual. Hazards Control 2025, 12, 201–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Carter, B.G.; Cheng, N.; Kapoor, R.; Meletharayil, G.H.; Drake, M.A. Invited review: Microfiltration-derived casein and whey proteins from milk. J. Dairy Sci. 2021, 104, 2465–2479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Nielsen, E.N.; Gøtke, M.; Cordin, U.; Skibsted, L.H.; Velizarov, S.; Crespo, J.G.; Ahrné, L.M. Effect of reverse osmosis pre-processing of acid whey and electrodialysis current density on process performance. Food Bioprod. Process. 2023, 140, 72–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Khalid, M.; Ghasem, N.; Yang, X.; Schroen, K.; Nazir, A. Progress in Membrane Technology for the Enrichment of Individual Whey Proteins. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2025, 64, 19305–19321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. eAmbrosia. Union Register of Geographical Indications. Database. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/eambrosia/geographical-indications-register/ (accessed on 12 November 2025).
  133. Papademas, P.; Bintsis, T.; Alichanidis, E.; Ardö, Y. Whey cheeses (Heat coagulated). Chapter 13. In Global Cheesemaking Technology: Cheese Quality and Characteristics; Papademas, P., Bintsis, T., Eds.; John Willey & Sons Ltd.: Chichester, UK, 2017; pp. 446–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Gobbetti, M.; Neviani, E.; Fox, P.; Varanini, G.M. The Cheeses of Italy: Science and Technology; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 1–274. [Google Scholar]
  135. Macit, E. Türkiye’s whey cheeses. Black Sea J. Agric. 2023, 6, 74–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Isipato, M. Application of Microbial Electrochemical Systems for Valorisation of Cheese Whey in Biorefinery Framework. Ph.D. Thesis, Università degli Studi di Cagliari, Scienze E Tecnologie Della Terra E Dell’ambiente (ICAR/03), Cagliari, Italy, 2021. Cycle XXXIII. Available online: https://tesidottorato.depositolegale.it/handle/20.500.14242/69531 (accessed on 3 November 2025).
  137. Simitzis, P.; Zikou, F.; Progoulakis, D.; Theodorou, G.; Politis, I. A note on the effects of yoghurt acid whey Marination on the tenderness and oxidative stability of different meat types. Foods 2021, 10, 2557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Stadnik, J.; Stasiak, D.M. Effect of acid whey on physicochemical characteristics of dry-cured organic pork loins without nitrite. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 51, 970–977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Vlahova-Vangelova, D.B.; Balev, D.K.; Dragoev, S.G.; Kirisheva, G.D. Improvement of technological and sensory properties of meat by whey marinating. Sci. Works Univ. Food Technol. 2016, 63, 7–13. Available online: http://uft-plovdiv.bg/site_files/file/scienwork/scienworks_2016/docs/original%20SWUFT201601103%20(final).pdf (accessed on 10 September 2025).
  140. Latoch, A.; Libera, J. Quality and safety of pork steak marinated in fermented dairy products and sous-vide cooked. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Latoch, A.; Czarniecka-Skubina, E.; Moczkowska-Wyrwisz, M. Marinades Based on Natural Ingredients as a Way to Improve the Quality and Shelf Life of Meat: A Review. Foods 2023, 12, 3638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  142. Latoch, A.; Moczkowska-Wyrwisz, M.; Sałek, P.; Czarniecka-Skubina, E. Effect of marinating in dairy-fermented products and sous-vide cooking on the protein profile and sensory quality of pork longissimus muscle. Foods 2023, 12, 3257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Kim, J. Effects of Acid Whey Marination on Tenderness, Sensory, and Other Quality Parameters of Beef Eye of Round. Master’s of Science, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA, 1 April 2018. Available online: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/6758 (accessed on 10 September 2023).
  144. Augustyńska-Prejsnar, A.; Ormian, M.; Hanus, P.; Kluz, M.; Sokołowicz, Z.; Rudy, M. Effects of marinating breast muscles of slaughter pheasants with acid whey, buttermilk, and lemon juice on quality parameters and product safety. J. Food Qual. 2019, 1, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Augustyńska-Prejsnar, A.; Sokołowicz, Z.; Hanus, P.; Ormian, M.; Kačániová, M. Quality and safety of marinating breast muscles of hens from organic farming after the laying period with buttermilk and whey. Animals 2020, 10, 2393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Karageorgou, A.; Paveli, A.; Goliomytis, M.; Theodorou, G.; Politis, I.; Simitzis, P. The effects of yoghurt acid whey marination on quality parameters of pork and chicken meat. Foods 2023, 12, 2360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Kęska, P.; Wójciak, K.M.; Stadnik, J. Effect of marination time on the antioxidant properties of peptides extracted from organic dry-fermented beef. Biomolecules 2019, 9, 614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Karwowska, M.; Kononiuk, A.D.; Borrajo, P.; Lorenzo, J.M. Comparative studies on the fatty acid profile and volatile compounds of fallow deer and beef fermented sausages without nitrite produced with the addition of acid whey. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 1320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Kadyan, S.; Rashmi, H.M.; Pradhan, D.; Kumari, A.; Chaudhari, A.; Deshwal, G.K. Effect of lactic acid bacteria and yeast fermentation on antimicrobial, antioxidative, and metabolomic profile of naturally carbonated probiotic whey drink. LWT 2021, 142, 111059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Ozer, B.; Evrendilek, G.A. Whey beverages. In Dairy Foods; Woodhead Publishing: London, UK; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2022; pp. 117–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Chawla, R.; Roy, S.; Malik, B. Valorisation of whey for development of different types of food products including fermented beverages. In Whey Valorization: Innovations, Technological Advancements and Sustainable Exploitation; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2023; pp. 211–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Altuntaş, S.; Hapoğlu, H. Kefir-type drinks from whey. In Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Grumezescu, A.M., Holban, A.M., Eds.; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2019; pp. 185–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Saha, P.; Ray, P.R.; Hazra, T. Evaluation of quality and stability of chhana whey beverage fermented with lactic acid bacteria. J. Dairy. Foods Home Sci. 2017, 36, 112–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Rizzolo, A.; Cortellino, G. Ricotta Cheese Whey-Fruit-Based Beverages: Pasteurization Effects on Antioxidant Composition and Color. Beverages 2017, 3, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Kotsaki, P.; Aspri, M.; Papademas, P. Novel Whey Fermented Beverage Enriched with a Mixture of Juice Concentrates: Evaluation of Antimicrobial, Antioxidant, and Angiotensin I Converting Enzyme Inhibitory (ACE) Activities Before and After Simulated Gastrointestinal Digestion. Microorganisms 2025, 13, 1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Szafrańska, J.O.; Waraczewski, R.; Bartoń, M.; Wesołowska-Trojanowska, M.; Maziejuk, W.; Nowak, P.; Sołowiej, B.G. Effects of organic fruit juices on physicochemical, microbiological, and antioxidative aspects of fermented whey beverages from organic goat and cow milk, produced at laboratory and industrial scales. J. Dairy Sci. 2024, 107, 10481–10496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Ganguly, S.; Sabikhi, L.; Singh, A.K. Evaluation of nutritional attributes of whey-cereal based probiotic beverage. LWT 2021, 159, 112292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Chavan, R.S.; Shraddha, R.C.; Kumar, A.; Nalawade, T. Whey Based Beverage: Its Functionality, Formulations, Health Benefits, and Applications. J. Food Process. Technol. 2015, 6, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Sar, T.; Bogovic Matijasic, B.; Danilovic, B.; Gamero, A.; Gandía, M.; Krausova, G.; Martínez-Villaluenga, C.; Peñas, E.; Bagherzadehsurbagh, E.; Cemali, Ö.; et al. A systematic review of the promoting effects of consumption of whey-based fermented products on adults. Front. Nutr. 2025, 12, 1651365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Ankiel, M.; Halagarda, M.; Piekara, A.; Sady, S.; Żmijowska, P.; Popek, S.; Pachołek, B.; Jefmański, B.; Kucia, M.; Krzywonos, M. Role of Certifications and Labelling in Ensuring Authenticity and Sustainability of Fermented Milk Products. Sustainability 2025, 17, 8398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on Nutrition and Health Claims Made on Foods. L404/9. 30.12.2006. Document 32006R1924. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32006R1924 (accessed on 3 November 2025).
  162. Garg, V.; Velumani, D.; Lin, Y.C.; Haye, A. A comprehensive review of probiotic claim regulations: Updates from the Asia-Pacific regions, the United States, and Europe. Pharma Nutr. 2024, 30, 100423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Mirzakulova, A.; Sarsembaeva, T.; Suleimenova, Z.; Kowalski, Ł.; Gajdzik, B.; Wolniak, R.; Bembenek, M. Whey: Composition, Processing, Application, and Prospects in Functional and Nutritional Beverages A Review. Foods 2025, 14, 3245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  164. Freire, P.; Zambrano, A.; Zamora, A.; Castillo, M. Thermal Denaturation of Milk Whey Proteins: A Comprehensive Review on Rapid Quantification Methods Being Studied, Developed and Implemented. Dairy 2022, 3, 500–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Foschi, M.; Biancolillo, A.; Reale, S.; Poles, F.; D’Archivio, A.A. Classification of “Ricotta” Whey Cheese from Different Milk and Designation of Origin-Protected Samples through Infrared Spectroscopy and Chemometric Analysis. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2025, 138, 107019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Skryplonek, K. The Use of Acid Whey for the Production of Yogurt-Type Fermented Beverages. Mljekarstvo 2018, 68, 139–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Igualada, C.; Giraldo, J.; Font, G.; Yusà, V. Validation of a Multi-Residue UHPLC-HRMS Method for Antibiotics Screening in Milk, Fresh Cheese, and Whey. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2022, 106, 104265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Ramos-Suárez, J.L.; Álvarez-Méndez, S.J.; Padrón Tejera, E.; Ritter, A.; Mata González, J. Temperature Control Effect on Cheese Whey Anaerobic Digestion with Low-Cost Tubular Digesters. Processes 2024, 12, 1452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Mahato, J.; Miah, M.; Shovon, M.S.; Roy, N.; Easmin, M.S.; Sharma, S.C.D. Electricity production by microbial fuel cell using cheese whey wastewater of the dairy industry in Rajshahi, Bangladesh. Chem. Biochem. Eng. Q. 2021, 35, 421–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Boudjema, K.; Fazouane-Naimi, F.; Hellal, A. Optimization of the bioethanol production on sweet cheese whey by Saccharomyces cerevisiae DIV13-Z087C0VS using response surface methodology (RSM). Rom. Biotechnol. Lett. 2025, 20, 10814–10825. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287521347_Optimization_of_the_Bioethanol_Production_on_Sweet_Cheese_Whey_by_Saccharomyces_cerevisiae_DIV13-Z087C0VS_using_Response_Surface_Methodology_RSM (accessed on 5 September 2025).
  171. Panghal, A.; Patidar, R.; Jaglan, S.; Chhikara, N.; Khatkar, S.K.; Gat, Y.; Sindhu, N. Whey valorization: Current options and future scenario—A critical review. Nutr. Food Sci. 2018, 48, 520–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Costa, M.A.; Kuhn, D.; Rama, G.R.; Lehn, D.N.; Souza, C.F.V.D. Whey butter: A promising perspective for the dairy industry. Braz. J. Food Technol. 2022, 25, e2021088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Athira, S.; Mann, B.; Sharma, R.; Pothuraju, R.; Bajaj, R.K. Preparation and characterization of iron-chelating peptides from whey protein: An alternative approach for chemical iron fortification. Food Res. Int. 2021, 141, 110133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Fahrullah, F.; Noersidiq, A.; Kisworo, D.; Maruddin, F. Evaluating Physicochemical Properties of Whey-Chia Seed Edible Films for Biodegradable Packaging. Trop. Anim. Sci. J. 2024, 47, 519–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Pratiwi, D.; Saputri, R.A.; Setiyawan, A.I. Whey edible film enhanced with ginger essential oil: Characterization and antimicrobial activity. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2024; Volume 1377, p. 012036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Wulandari, A.; Juliyarsi, I.; Melia, S. Improvement of Physicochemical Properties of Cheese Whey Edible Film through Egg White Addition. J. Ilmu Teknol. Has. Ternak 2024, 19, 139–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Asunis, F.; De Gioannis, G.; Francini, G.; Lombardi, L.; Muntoni, A.; Polettini, A.; Pomi, R.; Rossi, A.; Spiga, D. Environmental lifecycle assessment of polyhydroxyalkanoates production from cheese whey. Waste Manag. 2021, 132, 31–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  178. Dopazo, V.; Luz, C.; Calpe, J.; Vila-Donat, P.; Rodriguez, L.; Meca, G. Antifungal properties of whey fermented by lactic acid bacteria in films for the preservation of cheese slices. Int. J. Dairy Technol. 2022, 75, 619–629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Tamošaitis, A.; JaruševičienĖ, A.; StrykaitĖ, M.; Damašius, J. Analysis of antimicrobial whey protein-based biocomposites with lactic acid, tea tree (Melaleuca alternifolia), and garlic (Allium sativum) essential oils for Edam cheese coating. Int. J. Dairy Technol. 2022, 75, 611–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Risner, D.; Tomasino, E.; Hughes, P.; Meunier-Goddik, L. Volatile aroma composition of distillates produced from fermented sweet and acid whey. J. Dairy Sci. 2019, 102, 202–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Krishnan, N.U.; Joseph, M.T.; Shaiha, S.; Vani, P.V.; Raj, J.R.A. Optimization of Bio-Ethanol Production from Whey and the Characterization of Bio-Edible Films from the Fermentation Residue; Springer: Singapore, 2020; pp. 77–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Ferreira, A.; Gouveia, L. Chapter 28—Microalgal biorefineries. In Handbook of Microalgae-Based Processes and Products; Jacob-Lopes, E., Maroneze, M.M., Queiroz, M.I., Zepka, L.Q., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, UK, 2020; pp. 771–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Weide, T.; Peitzmeier, J.; Wetter, C.; Wichern, M.; Brügging, E. Comparison of thermophilic and hyperthermophilic dark fermentation with subsequent mesophilic methanogenesis in expanded granular sludge bed reactors. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2021, 57, 29142–29159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  184. Aranda-Jaramillo, B.; León-Becerril, E.; Aguilar-Juárez, O.; Castro-Muñoz, R.; García-Depraect, O. Feasibility Study of Biohydrogen Production from Acid Cheese Whey via Lactate-Driven Dark Fermentation. Fermentation 2023, 9, 644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Muñoz-Páez, K.M.; Buitrón, G.; Vital-Jácome, M. Predicting metabolic pathways and microbial interactions in dark fermentation systems treating real cheese whey effluents. Bioresour. Technol. 2024, 413, 131536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  186. Srivastava, S.; Jhariya, U.; Purohit, H.J.; Dafale, N.A. Synergistic action of lytic polysaccharide monooxygenase with glycoside hydrolase for lignocellulosic waste valorization: A review. Biomass Convers. Biorefin. 2023, 13, 8727–8745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Vasilakis, G.; Karayannis, D.; Massouras, T.; Politis, I.; Papanikolaou, S. Biotechnological Conversions of Mizithra Second Cheese Whey by Wild-Type Non-Conventional Yeast Strains: Production of Yeast Cell Biomass, Single-Cell Oil and Polysaccharides. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Colacicco, M.; De Micco, C.; Macrelli, S.; Agrimi, G.; Janssen, M.; Bettiga, M.; Pisano, I. Process scale-up simulation and techno-economic assessment of ethanol fermentation from cheese whey. Biotechnol. Biofuels Bioprod. 2024, 17, 124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Christensen, A.D.; Kádár, Z.; Oleskowicz-Popiel, P.; Thomsen, M.H. Production of bioethanol from organic whey using Kluyveromyces marxianus. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2011, 38, 283–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Tarapata, J.; Zieliński, M.; Zulewska, J. Valorization of Dairy By-Products: Efficiency of Energy Production from Biogas Obtained in Anaerobic Digestion of Ultrafiltration Permeates. Energies 2022, 15, 6829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Farnocchia, G.; Gómez-Camacho, C.E.; Pipitone, G.; Hischier, R.; Pirone, R.; Bensaid, S. Techno-Economic and Life Cycle Assessments of Aqueous Phase Reforming for the Energetic Valorization of Winery Wastewaters. Sustainability 2025, 17, 7856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Khramtsov, A.G.; Borisenko, A.A.; Volodin, D.N.; Borisenko, A.A.; Borisenko, L.A. Problems of processing milk whey as universal agricultural raw material and some ways to solve them. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2022; Volume 981, p. 022093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Pirttijärvi, T.S.; Ahonen, L.M.; Maunuksela, L.M.; Salkinoja-Salonen, M.S. Bacillus cereus in a whey process. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 1998, 44, 31–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  194. Paul, S.; Kulkarni, S.; Rao, K.J. Utilisation of concentrated whey in the production of multigrain bread: Optimisation of solid levels in concentrated whey and temperatures of baking. Int. Food Res. J. 2019, 26, 599–606. [Google Scholar]
  195. Pořízka, J.; Slavíková, Z.; Bidmonová, K.; Vymětalová, M.; Diviš, P. Physiochemical and sensory properties of bread fortified with wheat bran and whey protein isolates. Foods 2023, 12, 2635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Liu, X.; Jiang, D.; Peterson, D.G. Identification of bitter peptides in whey protein hydrolysate. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014, 62, 5719–5725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  197. de Aquino, L.F.M.C.; Ribeiro, R.D.O.R.; Simoes, J.S.; Mano, S.B.; M’arsico, E.T.; Junior, C.A.C. Mercury content in whey protein and potential risk for human health. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2017, 59, 141–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
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.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.