SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi / 2020 / Sayı: 20

Determination of the Usability of Glutopeak Analysis on Classification and Evaluation of Bread Wheat Varieties (Triticum aestivum L.) in the Same Category

Glutopik Analizinin Aynı Kategoride Yer Alan Ekmeklik Buğday Çeşitlerinin (Triticum aestivum L.) Sınıflandırma ve Değerlendirmesinde Kullanılabilirliğinin Belirlenmesi

Gökhan Çeliker(Diyarbakır Ticaret Borsası)0000-0002-0165-8619
Halef Dizlek(Osmaniye Korkut Ata Üniversitesi)0000-0001-5873-5462
Pages
409–424
Publication Date
2020-12-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In addition to this, it is determined that the water absorption of wheat flour is high whose maximum torque value is high, the dough’s resistance and extensibility increased and elasticity improved in parallel with A(0-5) area and distance’s increasing.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, firstly Farinograph and Extensograph properties of bread wheat varieties (Triticum aestivum L.) in the same category according to the TS 2974 Wheat standard were determined.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In the research, a total of 47 different bread wheat samples were used.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In addition to this, it is determined that the water absorption of wheat flour is high whose maximum torque value is high, the dough’s resistance and extensibility increased and elasticity improved in parallel with A(0-5) area and distance’s increasing.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Ekmeklik buğday · TS 2974 Buğday standardı · Tasnif

Abstract

In this study, firstly Farinograph and Extensograph properties of bread wheat varieties (Triticum aestivum L.) in the same category according to the TS 2974 Wheat standard were determined. Then it is aimed to determine the examination of compliance with the Soil Products Office's grain purchase criteria and the availability of Glutopeak analysis within the frame of classification and evaluation. In the research, a total of 47 different bread wheat samples were used. While the requirement of low amount of sample, short analysis time and giving information about gluten structure are creating the advantageous aspects of Glutopeak device; the large variability of obtained data and when the research continues producing company’s updating the software about device have suggested the necessity for further work needed to be done with the Glutopeak device. In addition to this, it is determined that the water absorption of wheat flour is high whose maximum torque value is high, the dough’s resistance and extensibility increased and elasticity improved in parallel with A(0-5) area and distance’s increasing.

Özet

Çalışmada TS 2974 Buğday standardına göre aynı kategoride yer alan ekmeklik buğday çeşitlerinin (Triticum aestivum L.) Farinograf ve Ekstensograf özelliklerinin belirlenerek TMO hububat alım kriterleriyle uyumluluğunun incelenmesi ve Glutopik analizinin bu sınıflandırma ve değerlendirme çerçevesinde kullanılabilirliğinin belirlenmesi hedeflenmiştir. Araştırmada toplam 47 farklı ekmeklik buğday numunesi kullanılmıştır. Glutopik cihazının düşük numune miktarı ihtiyacı, kısa analiz süresi ve gluten yapısı hakkında bilgi vermesi avantajlı yönlerini oluştururken, elde edilen verilerin değişkenliğinin çok olması ve araştırma devam ederken üretici firmanın cihazla ilgili yazılımı güncellemesi Glutopik üzerinde daha fazla çalışma yapılmasına gereksinim olduğunu göstermiştir. Bununla birlikte maksimum tork değeri yüksek olan buğday unlarının su absorbsiyonlarının yüksek olduğu, A(0-5) arası alan ve mesafenin büyümesine koşut olarak hamurun direnç ve uzama yeteneğinin arttığı, elastikiyetinin geliştiği belirlenmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Çeliker, G., Dizlek, H. (2020). Determination of the Usability of Glutopeak Analysis on Classification and Evaluation of Bread Wheat Varieties (Triticum aestivum L.) in the Same Category. Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, Sayı: 20, 409–424. https://doi.org/10.31590/ejosat.796345

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (29)

  1. Amoriello, T., Turfani, V., Galli, V., Mellara, F. & Carcea, M. (2016). Evaluation of new viscometer performance in predicting the technological quality of soft wheat flour. Cereal Chemistry, 93(4), 364-368.
  2. Anonymus (2018). Use Gluten to Quickly Determine Quality, Using the GlutoPeak. https://www.brabender.com/food/produkte/rheometer/via-gluten-schnell-mehle-schrote-vital-gluten-qualifizieren-glutopeak/#. (Erişim tarihi: 25.01.2019).
  3. Brunnbauer, M., Selmair, P. & Köhler, P. (2012). Determination of the gluten aggregation behaviour from different wheat cultivars and correlation with the rheological and the baking properties. ISFRS 2012 Congress, 10-13 April 2012 (in Brabender Glutopeak inkl. Software Glutopeak book), Duisburg, Germany, p:171-172.
  4. Chandi, G.K. & Seetharaman, K. (2012). Optimization of gluten peak tester: a statistical approach. Journal of Food Quality, 35(1), 69-75.
  5. Çeliker, G. & Dizlek, H. (2020). Ülkemizdeki buğday standardına göre aynı kategoride yer alan ekmeklik buğday çeşitlerinin reolojik özelliklerinin belirlenerek hububat alım kriterleriyle uyumluluğunun incelenmesi. Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 34(1), 71-92.
  6. Dizlek, H. & Çeliker, G. (2017). Wheat purchase criterias of Soil Crops Office (TMO) in Turkey and examination of its suitability. 2nd International Energy and Engineering Conference, 12-13 October 2017, Gaziantep, s:1231.
  7. Dizlek, H. & Özer, M.S. (2016). Effects of sunn pest (eurygaster integriceps) damage ratio on physical, chemical, and technological characteristics of wheat. Quality Assurance and Safety of Crops and Foods, 8(1), 145-156.
  8. Elgün, A. & Ertugay, Z. (1997). Tahıl İşleme Teknolojisi. Erzurum: Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Ofset Tesisleri.
  9. Greenaway, W.T., Neustadt, M.H. & Zeleny, L. (1965). A test for stink bug damage in wheat. Cereal Chemistry, 42(6), 577-579.
  10. Karaduman, Y., Akın, A., Türkölmez, S. & Tunca, Z.Ş. (2015). Ekmeklik buğday ıslah programlarında gluten kalitesinin değerlendirilmesi için glutopik parametrelerinin kullanılabilirliğinin araştırılması. Tarla Bitkileri Merkez Araştırma Enstitüsü Dergisi, 24(1), 65-74.
  11. Karaduman, Y., Önder, O., Sayaslan, A. & Aydın, N. (2019). Utilisation of glutopeak tester on whole-wheat flour for gluten quality assessment. Quality Assurance and Safety of Crops and Foods, 11(3), 295-304.
  12. Lu, Z. & Seetharaman, K. (2014). Suitability of Ontario-grown hard and soft wheat flour blends for noodle making. Cereal Chemistry, 91(5), 482-488.
  13. Lukow, O.M., Payne, P. & Tkauchuk, R. (1989). The HMW glutenin subunits composition of Canadian wheat cultivars and their association with bread-making quality. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 46, 451-460.
  14. Malegori, C., Grassi, S., Ohm, J.B., Anderson, J. & Marti, A. (2018). Glutopeak profile analysis for wheat classification: skipping the refinement process. Journal of Cereal Science, 79, 73-79.
  15. Marti, A., Cecchini, C., D'egidio, M.G., Dreisoerner, J. & Pagani, M.A. (2014). Characterization of durum wheat semolina by means of a rapid shear-based method. Cereal Chemistry, 91(6), 542-547.
  16. Marti, A., Qiu, X., Schoenfuss, T.C. & Seetharaman, K. (2015). Characteristics of Perennial Wheatgrass (Thinopyrum intermedium) and refined wheat flour blends: impact on rheological properties. Cereal Chemistry, 92(5), 434-440.
  17. Melnyk, J.P. (2011). Effect of the hofmeister series on gluten aggregation measured using a high shear-based technique. Food Research International, 44, 893-896.
  18. Posner, E.S. & Hibbs, A.N. (1997). Wheat Flour Milling. St. Paul, MN: American Association Cereal Chemists Incorporated.
  19. Sissons, M. (2016). GlutoPeak: a breeding tool for screening dough properties of durum wheat semolina. Cereal Chemistry, 93(6), 550-556.
  20. Şanal, T., Evlice, A.K., Pehlivan, A. & Külen, S. (2018). The relationship between some quality characteristics and glutopeak parameters in bread wheat. Proceedings of the 13th International Gluten Workshop, 14-17 March 2018, Mexico.
  21. TMO (2018). Toprak Mahsulleri Ofisi, Hububat Raporu, Ankara. TSE (2013a). Buğday - Sedimentasyon Endeksi Tayini - Zeleny Deneyi. TS EN ISO 5529, Ankara.
  22. TSE (2013b). Buğday, Çavdar ve Bunların Unları, Durum Buğdayı ve Durum Buğdayı İrmiği - Hagberg - Pertene Göre Düşme Sayısının Tayini. TS EN ISO 3093, Ankara.
  23. TSE (2015a). Tahıllar - Nem ve Protein Tayini - Bütün Tanelerde Yakın - Infrared - Spektroskopi Kullanma Metodu. TS EN 15948, Ankara.
  24. TSE (2015b). Buğday Unu - Hamurun Fiziksel Karakteristikleri - Bölüm 1: Farinograf Kullanılarak Su Absorbsiyonunun ve Reolojik Özelliklerinin Tayini. TSE EN ISO 5530-1, Ankara.
  25. TSE (2015c). Buğday Unu - Hamurun Fiziksel Karakteristikleri - Bölüm 2: Ekstensograf Kullanılarak Reolojik Özelliklerinin Tayini. TSE EN ISO 5530-2, Ankara.
  26. TSE (2016). Buğday ve Buğday Unu - Gluten İçeriği - Bölüm 2: Mekanik Yöntemle Yaş Gluten ve Gluten İndeksi Tayini. TS EN ISO 21415-2, Ankara.
  27. TSE (2018). Buğday, TS 2974, Ankara. Wang, K., Dupuis, B. & Fu, B.X. (2017). Gluten aggregation behavior in high-shear-based glutopeak test: impact of flour water absorption and strength. Cereal Chemistry, 94(5), 909-915.
  28. Wang, J., Hou, G.G., Liu, T., Wang, N. & Bock, J. (2018). GlutoPeak method improvement for gluten aggregation measurement of whole wheat flour. LWT-Food Science and Technology, 90, 8-14.
  29. Zawieja, B., Makowska, A. & Gutsche, M. (2020). Prediction of selected rheological characteristics of wheat based on glutopeak test parameters. Journal of Cereal Science, 91, 102898.