Unleashing the potential: Camel Milk and Urine Research insights for performance, collaboration, structure and future trends (1947–2023)

Figure 2. Country-specific production in CMUR. The density of the blue color indicates high production of CMUR-related publications. Countries with a dark blue color were the most productive. Countries outside the blue category did not make any contributions to the research in this particular area. This figure was generated using Bibliometrix and BibTex data files.

Table 2. The 10 most prolific authors, institutes and countries.

Figure 3. Distribution of subjects in CMUR. Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, Medicine, Immunology and Microbiology, Veterinary, Chemistry, Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics, Chemical Engineering, Nursing, Environmental Science, Engineering, Multidisciplinary, Social Sciences and Others. Others include Materials Science (0.73%), Computer Science (0.51%), Health Professions (0.51%), Energy (0.47%), Mathematics (0.34%), Physics and Astronomy (0.34%), Arts and Humanities (0.30%), Business, Management and Accounting (0.30%), Earth and Planetary Sciences (0.30%), Neuroscience (0.30%), Economics, Econometrics and Finance (0.17%) and Psychology (0.09%).

Figure 4. The collaborative research effort of nations interested in CMUR. 4 A: Offers a general picture of collaboration, where the country’s activity in terms of the quantity of international joint research projects is correlated with the intensity of the blue hue. lines indicate the number of collaborative research projects. For all nations, distinguishes between independent (SCP) and cooperative (MCP) scientific publishing. were generated using the BibTex file in the Bibliometrix application.

Figure 5. Overlay visualization was generated using VOSviewer. The nations that have recently entered the sphere of research cooperation are indicated by the yellow hue, which illustrates the temporal course for each country based on its participation in collaborative research activities. Co-authorship networks among countries was analyzed using VOSviewer, where countries were represented as nodes and collaborations as links.

Table 3. Top-cited documents in CMUR.

Table 4. The most frequent keywords.

Figure 6. Co-occurrence network of keywords (1947–2023). Clustering was performed using VOSviewer for the most frequent keywords. Seven clusters with different colors were obtained. The side of the node represents the frequency of the keyword.

Figure 7. Thematic map. The map was generated using Bibliometrix and author keywords. A thematic map was divided into four quadrants based on centrality and density, which represent the importance and development of research topics. This figure was generated using the Bibliometrix application and the BibTex data file.

Figure 8. Thematic evolution. Mapping was generated using Bibliometrix and author keywords. 2019 was a crucial point for the transformation of the main topics. This figure was generated using the Bibliometrix application and the BibTex data file.

Figure 9. Trend topic. Figure was generated using Bibliometrix and indexed keywords. Shubat is a Turkic beverage of fermented camel milk.

Table 5. Distribution of terms on the various clusters and themes.

Table 6. Details of trending topics.

Figure 10. Sankey diagram. AU: authors; AU_CO: country of the authors; SO: sources. The thickness of the lines connecting authors from different countries represents the number of papers co-authored. The thickness of the lines connecting countries and sources represents the number of papers from each country published in each source. Each rectangle represents the author, country, or source. The size of the rectangle represents the importance of nodes in the network. This figure was generated using the Bibliometrix application and the BibTex data file.

Figure 11. Co-citation of authors using network visualization techniques in VOSviewer. Out of 68,451 cited authors, 33 with a minimum of 120 citations were mapped into four clusters. Nodes represent citations. Four clusters were detected.

Table 7. Co-citation of authors and their distribution on different clusters of CMUR.

Lee, G. H., Tan, B. H., Chi-Yuan Teo, E., Lim, S. G., Dan, Y. Y., Wee, A., Kim Aw, P. P., Zhu, Y., Hibberd, M. L., Tan, C. K., Purdy, M. A., & Teo, C. G. (2016). Chronic infection with camelid hepatitis e virus in a liver transplant recipient who regularly consumes camel meat and milk. Gastroenterology, 150(2), 355.e353–357.e353. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2015.10.048

Enattah, N. S., Jensen, T. G. K., Nielsen, M., Lewinski, R., Kuokkanen, M., Rasinpera, H., El-Shanti, H., Seo, J. K., Alifrangis, M., Khalil, I. F., Natah, A., Ali, A., Natah, S., Comas, D., Mehdi, S. Q., Groop, L., Vestergaard, E. M., Imtiaz, F., Rashed, M. S., … Peltonen, L. (2008). Independent introduction of two lactase-persistence alleles into human populations reflects different history of adaptation to milk culture. American Journal of Human Genetics, 82(1), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2007.09.012

El-Agamy, E. I. (2007). The challenge of cow milk protein allergy. Small Ruminant Research, 68(1-2), 64–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2006.09.016

El Agamy, E. I., Ruppanner, R., Ismail, A., Champagne, C. P., & Assaf, R. (1992). Antibacterial and antiviral activity of camel milk protective proteins. The Journal of Dairy Research, 59(2), 169–175. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022029900030417

Abushelaibi, A., Al-Mahadin, S., El-Tarabily, K., Shah, N. P., & Ayyash, M. (2017). Characterization of potential probiotic lactic acid bacteria isolated from camel milk. LWT - Food Science and Technology, 79, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2017.01.041

El-Agamy, E. I., Nawar, M., Shamsia, S. M., Awad, S., & Haenlein, G. F. W. (2009). Are camel milk proteins convenient to the nutrition of cow milk allergic children?. Small Ruminant Research, 82(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2008.12.016

Restani, P., Gaiaschi, A., Plebani, A., Beretta, B., Cavagni, G., Fiocchi, A., Poiesi, C., Velonà, T., Ugazio, A. G., & Galli, C. L. (1999). Cross-reactivity between milk proteins from different animal species. Clinical and Experimental Allergy: Journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 29(7), 997–1004. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2222.1999.00563.x

Elagamy, E. I. (2000). Effect of heat treatment on camel milk proteins with respect to antimicrobial factors: A comparison with cows’ and buffalo milk proteins. Food Chemistry, 68(2), 227–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-8146(99)00199-5

Albrecht, S., Lane, J. A., Mariño, K., Al Busadah, K. A., Carrington, S. D., Hickey, R. M., & Rudd, P. M. (2014). A comparative study of free oligosaccharides in the milk of domestic animals. The British Journal of Nutrition, 111(7), 1313–1328. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114513003772

Moslehishad, M., Ehsani, M. R., Salami, M., Mirdamadi, S., Ezzatpanah, H., Naslaji, A. N., & Moosavi-Movahedi, A. A. (2013). The comparative assessment of ACE-inhibitory and antioxidant activities of peptide fractions obtained from fermented camel and bovine milk by Lactobacillus rhamnosus PTCC 1637. International Dairy Journal, 29(2), 82–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2012.10.015

Mudgil, P., Kamal, H., Yuen, G. C., & Maqsood, S. (2018). Characterization and identification of novel antidiabetic and anti-obesity peptides from camel milk protein hydrolysates. Food Chemistry, 259, 46–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.03.082

Ayyash, M., Al-Nuaimi, A. K., Al-Mahadin, S., & Liu, S. Q. (2018). In vitro investigation of anticancer and ACE-inhibiting activity, α-amylase and α-glucosidase inhibition, and antioxidant activity of camel milk fermented with camel milk probiotic: A comparative study with fermented bovine milk. Food Chemistry, 239, 588–597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.06.149

Kappeler, S. R., Van Den Brink, H. M., Rahbek-Nielsen, H., Farah, Z., Puhan, Z., Hansen, E. B., & Johansen, E. (2006). Characterization of recombinant camel chymosin reveals superior properties for the coagulation of bovine and camel milk. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, 342(2), 647–654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2006.02.014

Sawaya, W. N., Khalil, J. K., Al‐Shalhat, A., & Al‐Mohammad, H. (1984). Chemical composition and nutritional quality of camel milk. Journal of Food Science, 49(3), 744–747. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1984.tb13200.x

Park, Y. W. (2007). Rheological characteristics of goat and sheep milk. Small Ruminant Research, 68(1-2), 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2006.09.015