4.2 Article

Gluten viscoelasticity: Rapid method for classification of soft-like wheat genotypes

期刊

CEREAL CHEMISTRY
卷 96, 期 2, 页码 167-181

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cche.10128

关键词

elastic recovery; flour quality; gluten; rheology; technological properties

资金

  1. National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) [246363]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and objectives Standard empirical methods to assess wheat quality are difficult to perform, interpret, time consuming and require a large amount of sample. A rapid uniaxial compression instrument based on measuring height of gluten during compression and recovery is reported. The objective of this study was to determine in a set of soft-like wheat genotypes from Brazil the best conditions to extract the gluten and analyze the efficiency of the method separating categories based on gluten viscoelastic properties. Findings The independent variables evaluated were as follows: (a) technological quality categories and gluten extraction method; (b) amount of 2% NaCl solution (w/v) added for dough formation; (c) mixing time; and (d) washing time. The results were submitted to analysis of variance and means compared by protected LSD test (p < 0.05). The best conditions for gluten extraction and analysis were obtained with 4.4 ml of 2% NaCl solution, mixing for 20 s, and washing for 3 min. Elastic recovery of gluten showed a strong correlation (r) with standard methods used to classify wheat (dough strength r = 0.988, stability r = 0.963). Conclusion The elastic recovery was able to separate the gluten samples in three categories efficiently and may be a useful tool in breeding programs and flour mills quality control. Significance and novelty: A novel method for determining elastic recovery of gluten from soft-type wheat genotypes was developed. The set of samples had high correlation of gluten elastic recovery with key quality parameters. Advantages of the test include rapid analysis time (less than 5 min) and small sample size (10 g of flour).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据