evaluation of some potential rice varieties of ......evaluation of some potential rice varieties of...
TRANSCRIPT
EVALUATION OF SOME POTENTIAL RICE
VARIETIES OF CHHATTISGARH FOR PUFFING
AND FLAKING
M.Tech. (Agril. Engg.) Thesis
by
ANITA LAKRA
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING &
FOOD ENGINEERING
SVCAET & RS, FACULTY OF AGRICULTURAL
ENGINEERING
INDIRA GANDHI KRISHI VISHWAVIDYALAYA RAIPUR
(Chhattisgarh)
2017
EVALUATION OF SOME POTENTIAL RICE
VARIETIES OF CHHATTISGARH FOR PUFFING
AND FLAKING
Thesis
Submitted to the
Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur
by
Anita Lakra
IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF
Master of Technology
in
Agricultural Processing and Food Engineering
Roll No.220114001 ID No. 20141520459
January 2017
CERTIFICATE-I
This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Evaluation of some potential rice
varieties of Chhattisgarh for puffing and flaking” submitted in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Technology of the
Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur, is a record of the bonafiede
research work carried out by Anita Lakra under my guidance and supervision.
The subject of the thesis has been approved by the Student’s Advisory Committee
and the Director of Instruction.
No part of the thesis has been submitted for any other degree or diploma or
published/published part has been fully acknowledged. All the assistance and help
received during the course of the investigations have been duly acknowledge by
her.
Date: Chairman
(Dr. D. Khokhar)
THESIS APPROVED BY THE STUDENT’S ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Chairman (Dr. D. Khokhar) ________________________
Member (Dr. S. Patel) ________________________
Member (Dr. R. R. Saxena) ________________________
Member (Dr. S. Bhandarkar) ________________________
Member (Er.P.S.Pisalkar) ________________________
CERTIFICATE-II
This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Evaluation of some potential rice
varieties of Chhattisgarh for puffing and flaking” submitted by Anita Lakra to
Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur, in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Master of Technology in the Department of
Agricultural Processing and Food Engineering has been approved by the examiner
and Student’s Advisory Committee after oral examination.
Signature External Examiner
(Name )
Date:
Major Advisor
Head of the Department
Faculty Dean
Approved/Not approved
Director of Instructions
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
It is by the blessings of the almighty, that I have able to complete my present studies
successfully and the piece of work for which I am eternally indebted
It gives me immense pleasure to express my profound sense of gratitude and respect to
my Major Advisor Dr. D Khokhar, scientist, AICRP on Post Harvest Technology, Agricultural
Processing and Food Engineering, Swami Vivekananda College of Agricultural Engineering
and Technology and Research Station, Faculty of Agricultural Engineering, IGKV, Raipur,
for his constructive criticism, learned counsel, meticulous guidance, encouragement in planning
and execution of research work and affectionate treatment during the course of investigation,
writing and presentation of thesis.
I am highly indebted to the member of advisory committee Dr. S. Patel, Professor and
Head of Department, Agricultural Processing and Food Engineering, Swami Vivekananda
College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology and Research Station, Faculty of
Agricultural Engineering, IGKV, Raipur, for his untiring help, valuable suggestions and
timely moral support, which enabled me to accomplish this task.
I am greatly indebted to other members of my advisory committee, Dr. R. R. Saxena,
Professor, Department of Agricultural Statistics, Dr. S. Bhandarkar professor, Department of
Genetics and Plant Breeding, Er. P. S. Pisalkar, Department of Agricultural Processing and
Food Engineering IGKV, Raipur for their continuous advice, guidance and encouragement
throughout the course of investigations.
I wish to express my deep sense of gratitude to Dean Dr. V.K. Pandey, Swami
Vivekananda College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology and Research Station,
Faculty of Agricultural Engineering, IGKV, Raipur, for providing necessary facilities and help
regarding the research work.
I like to express my sincere thanks to Dr. A. K Dave, Head of Department of Farm
Machinery and Power and Dr. M. P. Tripathi, Head of Department of Soil Water Engineering
and for their kind support and help at various stages of the study.
My heartiest thanks to Er. N. K. Mishra, Er. P.S. Pisalkar, Er. A. Kalne Assistant
Professor (APFE), and all staff of Department of Agricultural Processing and Food
Engineering, for their benign help, valuable suggestions during planning of experiment and
critical appraisal of this manuscript.
I am also thankful to faculty members, Dr. V. P. Verma, Er. A. P. Mukharjee, Er.
Md. Quasim, Dr. S.V. Jogdand, Dr. V. M. Victor, Dr. Jitendra Sinha,. Er. P. Katre, Er. D.
Khalkho, for their timely co-operation during the course of study.
I am thankful to all the technical and clerical staff members and other staff members
SVCAET & RS, Faculty of Agricultural Engineering for their kind support and help during
entire study.
I am deeply obligate and grateful to Head R.H. Richharia Research Laboratory, Head
Department of Plant Physiology Laboratory, and all staff of these laboratories for their timely
help and co-operate during experiments work.
I am very thankful to Mr. Ajit kumar, Mr. Ashish and Mrs. Ajanli, who helped me
during the experiments work.
I avail this pleasant opportunity to express my sincere thanks to my class mates Lalit,
Priya, Rajkumari, Pooja, Yograj, Pravin Nishad, Shilpi, Nilima, Dhriti shashikant, Yogesh,
Gopikant, Aditya, Rakshyap, Navneet Luv, and my beloved seniors Deepak, Omprakash,
Vikram, Jaspal, Pankaj, and all my juniors for their love, contribution and timely help during
course of study. I also express special thanks to all those who helped directly or indirectly
during this study.
I have no words to express my hearty gratitude to my beloved parents, Father Mr.
Ignatius Lakra and Mother Mrs. Jacinta Lakra and my other family members, whose fifial
affection, environment, love and blessings have been a beacon of light for the successful
completion of this achievement.
Above all, my humble and whole heartily prostration to the almighty for their
Blessings
Place: Raipur (Anita Lakra)
Date:
TABLE OF CONTENT
Chapter Title Page No.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF NOTATIONS/SYMBOLS
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ABSTRACT (English)
ABSTRACT (Hindi)
I INTRODUCTION
II REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Physical Properties of Paddy/Milled Rice
2.2 Milling Characteristics of Paddy
2.3 Cooking Characteristics of Rice
2.4 Physicochemical Properties of Rice
2.5 Pre-treatment (parboiling) of Paddy
2.6 Puffing/Popping Characteristics of Parboiled Milled Rice
2.7 Flaking Characteristics of Cereals
2.8 Sensory Evaluation of Flakes and Puffed Cereals
III MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1 Preparation of Samples
3.2 Experimental Design
3.3 Physical Methods
3.3.1 Measurement of moisture content
3.3.2 Dimensions
3.3.3 Geometric mean diameter (De)
3.3.4 Sphericity (Sp)
3.3.5 Surface area
3.3.6 Mass of paddy seeds
3.3.7 Bulk density
3.3.8 True density of paddy
3.3.6 Mass of paddy seeds
3.3.7 Bulk density
3.3.8 True density of paddy
3.3.9 Porosity (ε)
3.3.10 Aspect ratio (Ra)
3.3.11 Angle of repose
3.3.12 Static coefficient of friction
3.4 Determine of milling characteristics
3.4.1 Hulling percentage
3.4.2 Milling percentage
3.5 Preparation of Thick Size and Thin size Flaked Rice
3.6 Method of Preparing Flaked Rice
3.7 Physical and Functional Properties of Flakes
3.7.1 Yield of flakes
3.7.2 Bulk density
3.7.3 True density
3.7.4 Water absorption index and water solubility index
3.7.5 Water uptake (WU)
3.7.6 Swelling power (SP)
3.8 Standarization of Puffed Rice
3.8.1 Preparation of parboiled milled rice
3.8.2 Puffed rice by using a continuous fluidized bed rice
puffing machine
3.8.3 Method for preparing puffed rice
3.8.4 Conditioning and preheating of parboiled milled rice
3.9 Physical Properties of Puffed Rice
3.9.1 Puffing yield
3.9.2 Bulk density
3.9.3 Volume expansion ratio
3.10 Chemical Properties
3.10.1 Moisture content
3.10.2 Alkali spreading value (ASV)
3.10.3 Determination of gel consistency.
3.10.4 Fat content
3.10.5 Ash content
3.10.6 Protein content
3.10.7 Determination of Starch content.
3.10.8 Determination of amylose
3.10.9 Amylopectin
3.11 Sensory Evaluation of Flaked and Puffed rice
3.12 Statistical Analysis
IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Popularly Methods used for Producing Puffed Rice and Flaked Rice
Processing in the Chhattisgarh State
4.1.1 Traditional method–Rice puffing by hot sand roasting
method
4.1.2 Commercial method–rice puffing by hot sand roasting
method
4.3.3 Traditional method-rice flaking by using dhenki unit
4.1.4 Commercial method-rice flaking by using edge runner
machine
4.2 Physical Properties of Paddy
4.2.1 Moisture content (M.C.)
4.2.2 Length, width and thickness (LWT)
4.2.3 Geometric mean diameter (GMD)
4.2.4 Mass of paddy seed (M)
4.2.5 Sphericity ( Sp)
4.2.6 Aspect ratio (Ra )
4.2.7 Surface area (Sa)
4.2.8 Bulk density and True density (BD and TD)
4.2.9 Angle of repose (φ)
4.2.10 Coefficient of friction
4.3 Hulling and milling percentage
4.4 Chemical properties of rice
4.4.1 Alkali spreading value and gel consistency of rice.
4.4.2 Amylose, starch and amylopectin
4.5 Physical and Functional Properties of Flaked Rice
4.5.1 Moisture content while processing
4.5.2 Change in physical properties during development of
flaked rice from paddy
4.5.2.1 Yield of flaked rice
4.5.2.2 Length, width and thickness of flaked rice
4.5.2.3 Bulk and true density of flaked rice
4.5.3 Functional properties of flaked rice
4.6 Proximate Composition of Rice and Flaked Rice
4.7 Moisture Content of Raw, Soaked, Steamed and Parboiled Paddy
Samples
4.8 Physical Characteristics of Puffed Rice
4.8.1 Expansion characteristics of varieties (LER, WER and
VER of varieties)
4.8.2. Puffing yield
4.8.3 Bulk density
4.9 Nutritional composition of puffed rice from different rice varieties.
4.10 Sensory Evaluation
V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Appendix B
RESUME
LIST OF TABLES
Table Title Page
3.1 Treatments for standardization of puffing temperature for
puffed rice.
3.2 Scale for alkali spreading value or gelatinization
temperature
3.3 Classification of gel 4.1 Physical properties of different varieties of paddy 4.2 Coefficient of friction of different paddy varieties 4.3 Hulling and milling percentage 4.4 Alkali spreading value and gel consistency of rice 4.5 Chemical properties of rice 4.6 Moisture content of different paddy varieties while
processing into flakes
4.7 Yield of flaked rice after processing 4.8 Change in physical properties during development of flaked
rice from paddy.
4.9 Functional properties of different varieties of flaked rice 4.10 Individual CRD analysis for proximate composition of rice
and flaked rice
4.11 Moisture content of the paddy varieties while processing
into parboiled samples
4.12 Effect of varietal differences on expansion characteristics of
rice
4.13 Square root transformation applied for (LER), (WER) and
(VER)
4.14 Yield and bulk density of puffed rice at different
temperature
4.15 Individual CRD analysis for nutritional composition of
puffed rice from different rice varieties
4.16 Sensory quality of flaked rice 4.17 Sensory quality of Puffed rice
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Title Page
3.1 Measurement of moisture content by hot air oven
3.2 Paddy seeds used for puffing and flaking
3.3 Measurement the weight of paddy seeds by electronic
balance
3.4 Measurement of bulk density of paddy seeds
3.5 Satake rubber rolls sheller for dehusking
3.6 Satake whitener for polishing of rice
3.7 Process flow chart for the development of the different size
flaked rice
3.8 Soaked paddy
3.9 Roasting unit
3.10 Edge runner
3.11 Flaked rice
3.12 Water bath for water uptake
3.13 Parboiled rice
3.14 Process flow chart for preparation of puffed rice
3.15 Salted treated parboiled rice
3.16 Pre-heating
3.17 Continuous fluidized puffing machine
3.18 Puffed rice
3.19 Determination of GT
3.20 Determination gel consistency
3.21 Determination of fat content
3.22 Ash content
3.23 Determination of amylose
3.24 Standard graph of amylose solution using anthrone reagent
3.25 Water bath and UV Photo Spectrometer
4.1 Rice puffed by hot sand roasting – traditional method
4.2 Rice samples exposed to hot sand
4.3 Puffed rice separated by sieve
4.4 Rice puffed by hot sand roasting method- commercial
method
4.5 Rice puffing unit by commercial method
4.6 Dhenki unit for making flaked rice
4.7 Rice flaking by edge runner machine- commercial method
4.8 Rice flaking unit
4.9 Effect of moisture content on hulling and milling
4.10 Chemical present in different varieties
4.11 Effect of moisture content during processing of flaked rice
4.12 Flaked rice of different paddy varieties
4.13 Effect of moisture content while processing of parboiled
rice.
4.14 Effect of temperature on puffing yield
4.15 Puffed rice at different temperature
4.15 Graph of average number given by the judges for flaked rice
using nine point hedonic scale
4.16 Products made for sensory evaluation
4.17 Graph of average number given by the judges for puffed rice
using nine point hedonic scale
LIST OF NOTATION/SYMBOL
Symbol Description
% Per cent
˂ Less than
˃ More than
× Multiple
α Angel of tilt
ϕ Degree of sphericity
θ Angle of repose
µ Coefficient of static friction
µL Micro liter
⁰C Degree Celsius
cm Centimeter
D Diameter
Da Arithmetic mean diameter
De Geometric mean diameter
etc. etcetera
g gram
g/ml Gram per milliliter
H Height
Ha Weight of rice after hulling
Hb Weight of paddy before hulling
h hour
i.e. That is
kg kilogram
L Length
Lf Final length
Li Initial length
m meter
mm milli meter
min. minute
ml Milli liter
mg milli gram
Ma Total weight of rice after milling
Mb Total weight of rice before milling
rpm revolution per minute
Sa Surface area
T Thickness
W Width
Wws Weight of wet sediment
Wf Weight of rice flour
Wds Weight of dry solids
Wf Width of puffed rice samples
Wi Width of unpuffed rice samples
W1 Initial weight of wet material sample
W2 Final weight of dried sample
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Agri. Agriculture
Agril Agricultural
AICRP All India Coordinated Research Project
AOAC Association of Official Agricultural Chemist
CRD Completely randomized design
C.G. Chhattisgarh
CV Coefficient of Variance
Engg. Engineering
et al. et alibi
etc. etcetera
FAE Faculty of Agricultural Engineering
Fig. Figure
ICAR Indian Council of Agricultural Research
IGKV Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya
M. Tech Master of Technology
PHET Post-Harvest Engineering and Technology
SD Standard Deviation
THESIS ABSTRACT
a) Title of thesis:
Evaluation of Some potential rice
varieties of Chhattisgarh for puffing
and flaking
b) Full Name of the Student: Anita Lakra
c) Major Subject Agricultural Processing and Food
Engineering
d) Name and Address of the Major
Advisor:
Dr. D. Khokhar Scientist,
AICRP on PHT
Department of Agricultural Processing
and Food , SVCAET & RS, FAE,
IGKV, Raipur
e) Degree to be Awarded: Master of Technology in Agricultural
Engineering
Signature of the Student
Signature of Major Advisor
Date
Signature of Head of Department
ABSTRACT
Chhattisgarh popularly known as “Rice Bowl” of India. Numerous varieties
of paddy are grown in the different parts of the state comprising of bold, long,
cylinder, fine, and scented etc. Many varieties are best suited for raw milling
whereas many are suitable for parboiling to produce rice for table purpose with
direct cooking. On the other hand, many of the varieties are better suited for the
production of rice value added products such as flaked rice (Poha or Chiwda),
puffed rice (Muri or Murra or Murmura). Therefore the present investigation was
undertaken to study some potential rice varieties of Chhattisgarh for puffing and
flaking.
Study was conducted about processing methods for puffed rice and flaked
rice. After survey different methods (traditional and commercial methods) were
observed for puffed and flaked rice.
Study was conducted to evaluate the puffing and flaking characteristics of
selected paddy varieties in the Department of Agricultural Processing and Food
Engineering, FAE, IGKV, Raipur. The moisture content of paddy varieties varied
from 11.38 to 11.99 % (wb). Average length, width, thickness, geometric mean
diameter, aspect ratio, porosity, true density, bulk density and coefficient of
friction were measured. All varieties had different dimensions, the length of
Mahamaya, Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha varied from 8.41 to 10.45, 8.05 to 11.15
and 10.87 to13.20 mm, width varied from 2.08 to 3.29, 2.09 to 3.18, and 2.27 to
3.83 mm and thickness varied from 1.85 to 2.93, 1.88 to 3.26 and 1.49 to 3.21 mm.
Bulk density and true density varied from 0.69 to 0.72, 0.69 to 0.74, 0.46 to
0.48g/ml and 1.00 to 1.25, 1.00 to 1.67, 1.00 to 1.25g/ml respectively. After
processing of paddy it was found that the yield of flakes of Mahamaya,
Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha were 64.6, 68.5 and 62.9 % respectively. The water
absorption index and water solubility index found high in Rajeshwari variety,
4.575 to 4.685 for thin and 6.945 to 7.255 for thick flaked rice and water solubility
index found 1.26 to 1.29 for thick and 0.555 to 0.835 for thin size flaked rice. It
was found that moisture content, fat content, protein content were decreased and
ash content was increased after processing of flaked rice.
After processing to puffed rice found that yield of puffing was more in
Mahamaya variety at temp. 310˚C, 290˚C and 270˚C it was 79.56, 75.95 and 70.9
% and in Rajeshwari variety it was 75.25, 71.24 and 55.26 % respectively. Length,
width and volume were increased after processing to puffed rice and found more
expansion in Mahamaya variety. Finally observed that Rajeshwari and Mahamaya
varieties were more suitable for flaking and puffing.
CHAPTER-I
INTRODUCTION
Rice is used as an important staple food by the people in many parts of the
world after wheat (Ghadge and Prasad, 2012). The world’s major rice producing
countries are China, India, Indonesia, Bangladesh and Vietnam and 90 percent of
the world area under rice cultivation is in Asia. Moreover, rice is used as a source
of nourishment for more than half of the world’s population, thus, making it as
second most important cereal grain (Bhatia et al, 2009, Prasad et al, 2010a, b, c).
Further rice being rich in carbohydrates to about 60 to 70% of the daily energy
needs of major chunks of the society. Also as convenience food such as breakfast
cereals, multigrain flakes, puffed, popped, and extruded products rice is
extensively used. The pregelatinized and puffed flour has also been utilized as
ingredients for cakes, deserts and sweets, formulated baby foods, soups, stews,
crackers, noodles, puddings, bread, fermented foods like idli, dosai, dhokla, rice
vinegar, wine etc. Moreover, rice starch has been used as thickener and is the raw
material for the production of various rice based food preparations (Prasad et al,
2013).
Rice flakes are the most common breakfast cereal used all over the country
round the year. Rice flakes is locally known by many names like aval, avalakki,
poha, chivda and beaten rice, which are prepared from paddy and has been claimed
as a good source of protein, fat and carbohydrate. Rice flakes are prepared from
paddy . It is also popularly known as “Poha”. It is a fast moving consumer item
and generally eaten as breakfast item. It can be fried with spices and chilly to make
hot and tasty food iteam or milk or curd is mixed with it and then eaten. It is also
used in large quantities for making ‘Chevda’ and many caterers use it for thickness
of gravy. Since it is made from paddy, it is easily digestible. Most of its
preparation can be made at a short notice and hence bulk of the households store it
on regular basis. With proper storage, its shelf life is 2-3 months. This is a common
product and can be produced anywhere in the country.
Rice flakes are made from paddy and hence they are easily to digest. Spicy
as well as sweet preparations are made from them in the category of fast food
items. Since the manufacturing process involves roasting of rice, the shelf life of
flakes is longer. Rice flakes or poha is an important breakfast in semi-urban and
rural areas and middle class families of urban India. Spicy or sweet preparations
made from it are not only easy to make but they can be made at a short notice as
well. Therefore it is extensively used all over the country round the year.
Puffed rice is a whole-grain puffed product obtained from pre-gelatinized
milled parboiled rice, generally prepared from preconditioning of grains by
hydrothermal treatment, followed by drying and milling. The milled grains are
treated with salt water to an optimum moisture content, which is then subjected to
puffing by sand roasting method. Consumption of these may thus been like to
reduce the prevalence of disease risk (FDA, 2006). Puffed rice is used in snack
foods and breakfast cereals, and is also a popular street food in some parts of the
world. It is an ingredient of bhel puri, a popular Indian chaat item. It is also used in
temples and gurudwaras as Prasad. Absence of gluten provides additional benefit
and makes rice particularly suitable as an alternative either in full form or as
replacement of wheat in bakery products especially suitable for the celiac subjects
(Prasad et al, 2010b). Further on the process of roasting the rice starch gets
damaged, gelatinized and subsequently a portion of it is retrograded, which
ultimately leads to the formation of resistant starch. This changed form of rice
starch in resistant starch may be nutritionally important fraction as dietary starch,
which may thus escapes unaffected during digestion and adsorption in the small
intestine. Also if it goes to large intestine in unaffected form may serve as nutrient
for the gut microflora. The roasted or toasted form of rice as puffed or roasted
flaked rice may thus also be considered as prebiotic foods apart from the
conventional and nutritious low cost easily reach food to masses.
Chhattisgarh popularly known as “Rice Bowl” of India. The cultivation of
rice covered 3787.73 thousand ha. Of cultivated land of the state. Numerous
varieties of paddy are grown in the different parts of the state comprising of bold,
long, cylinder, fine, and cented etc. Many varities are best suited for raw milling
whereas many are suitable for parboiling to produce rice for table purpose with
direct cooking. On the other hand, many of the varities are better suited for the
production of rice value added products such as flaked rice (Poha or Chiwda),
puffed rice (Muri or Murra or Murmura). Similarly, some of the varieties are
popularly used for the production of lai or khilli. It is important to note that the
requirement of these products from the paddy or rice is an important as rice as food
in general. These products are prepared from local as well as improved varieties,
these varieties are very clearly identified by the manufactures/processors. It is very
much essential to identify the varieties suitable for this purpose to check the huge
loss of milling as well as to produce the quality value added product. Some of the
high yielding varieties have poor milling characteristics, due to which there is a
threat to disappearing of many traditional varieties, which may be suitable for
production of value added products like puffed and flaked rice having good
marketability potential. Less work has been done to identify the suitable rice
varieties for puffing and flaking characteristics. Hence, the study will be carried
out with the following objectives:
1. To study about processing methods popularly used for producing puffed
and flaked rice.
2. To study about puffing and flaking characteristics of selected varieties of
paddy.
3. To standardize the processing parameters for the puffing and flaking of rice
CHAPTER-II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Physical Properties of Paddy/Milled Rice
Ghasemi et al. (2007) studied the some physical properties of raw paddy
(var. Sazandegi). At moisture content of 10 per cent (wb) the average grain length,
width and thickness were 8.54, 2.47 and 1.83 mm, respectively while the
equivalent mean diameter, surface area and volume were 3.4 mm, 32.58 mm² and
21.063 mm, respectively. The sphericity and aspect ratio were 39.88 and 0.29 per
cent, respectively. True density, bulk density and porosity were 1193.38 kg m-3,
471.16 kg m-3 and 60.37 per cent, respectively while the static coefficient of
friction varied from 0.2186 on glass sheet to 0.4279 on plywood. The angle of
repose for emptying was 5.83˚.
Anonymous (2009) reported that length of the hulled grain is simply a
measure of the rough rice kernel in its greatest dimension while the width of the
hulled grain is the measure of the rough rice kernel width in its maximum
dimension. The length and width of the seed rice are variable, sometimes even
within a variety, because of the variation in the length of the awn and the pedicel.
(Slaton et al., 2000).Rice varieties are classified as short, medium, or long grain by
rough kernel dimension ratio.
Zareiforoush et al. (2009) studied the various physical properties of two
different paddy cultivars were determined at five moisture content levels of 8, 11,
14, 18 and 21% per cent (db). In the case of Alikazemi cultivar, the average length,
width, thickness, equivalent diameter, surface area, volume, sphericity, thousand
grain mass and angle of repose were found to increase with the moisture content
increased from 8 to 21 per cent (db) respectively, for Hashemi cultivar. For
Alikazemi cultivar, the static coefficient of friction of grains increased linearly
against three various surfaces, namely, glass, galvanized iron sheet and plywood as
the moisture content increased from 8 to 21 per cent (db).
Ashtiani et al. (2010) studied the effect of moisture content on some
physical properties of two common rice varieties (Sorkheh and Sazandegi) was
determined. Moisture content had a significant effect on minor diameter, geometric
mean diameter, mass, bulk and true densities, porosity, static coefficient of friction
and angle of repose. The geometric mean diameter, sphericity, true density and
angle of repose increased and bulk density decreased as moisture content increased
from 12 to 16 per cent (wb).
Bhonsle et al. (2010) studied the physicochemical characteristics were
studied for 22 traditionally cultivated rice varieties from Goa, in comparison with
high yielding rice varieties Jaya, Jyoti and IR - 8. The hulling percentage ranged
from 63-81 per cent and Husked Ratio (HR) recovery from 45 - 74 per cent.
Among the varieties Length/Breath ratio ranged from 1.5 - 3.5 and the Amylose
Content (AC) ranged from 14 - 25 per cent. The lowest percentage of chalkiness
was recorded in variety Barik Kudi. Highest Gel Consistancy (GC) was recorded in
variety Salsi and lowest in Khochro. The kernel elongation ratio ranged from 4.78 -
1.83 mm and water uptake ratio ranged from 160-390.
Zareiforoush et al. (2011) studied the effect of moisture content on some
physical properties of paddy grains. They have reported 6 levels of moisture
content ranging from 8 to 24 per cent (db) were used. The average length, width,
thickness, equivalent diameter, surface area, sphericity, thousand grain mass, angle
of repose, aspect ratio, bulk density and true density were found to increase with
the increase in moisture content whereas, the porosity was found to be decreased.
Ghadge and Prasad (2012) determined some of the physical properties of
PR-106 type of rice variety which may influence the rice processing operations.
The physical properties Length (L), Width (W), Thickness (T), Mass (M) and
Volume (V) were measured at a moisture content of 13.34 ± 0.53% (dry basis) and
the following results were obtained: the average split length, width, thickness, unit
mass and volume were 6.61 mm, 1.75 mm,1.14 mm, 0.017 g, and 0.051 cm³
respectively. The calculated physical properties like the geometric mean diameter,
surface area, porosity, sphericity, true density and aspect ratio were 2.52 mm,
20.10 mm², 47.07%, 38.28%, 1.521 g/ml and 26.58% respectively. The static
coefficient of friction varied on three different surfaces from 0.217 on galvanized
steel sheet, 0.239 on plywood to 0.249 on glass with splits perpendicular to
direction of motion, while the angle of repose was 34.86˚.
Jouki and Khazaei (2012) reported that physical and mechanical properties
of rice are necessary for the design of equipment to handle, transport, process and
store the crop. The grain was tested for bulk density, true density, sphericity,
porosity, angle of internal friction and coefficient of friction with various materials
at 12% moisture content (dry basis). The average length, width, thickness and the
average thousand grain weight of the rye grains were 7.43, 2.75, 2.53 mm and
26.91 g. The static coefficient of friction 0.4835, 0.4061 and 0.3670 for wood,
galvanized iron and glass surface respectively.
Jafarzade et al. (2012) determine the physical characteristics of grain.
Physical properties of rice were evaluated in terms of volume, bulk density, kernel
density, mass of 1000 seeds and porosity for three varieties of commercial rice
(Tarom, Ramezani and Fajr) the impact of moisture level was also investigated.
Tests were done for 3 varieties of rice and 4 levels of moisture. Physical properties
of rice grains such as mass of 1000 seeds, volume and porosity increased as
moisture increased but bulk density decreased. With an increased moisture
percentage from 4.5 to 19%, the percentage of mass of 1000 seeds, volume,
porosity and coefficients of surface friction increased.
Kanchana et al. (2012) experiment was conducted to know the physical
qualities of 41 rice varieties. Length, Breadth, Bulk density and 1000 grains weight
were determined. From this experiment the rice varieties Karnataka ponni, CR,
Ambai 16, Ambai 36 (Tirunelveli), ASD 19, CR 1009 (Madurai) and CR 1 and
Culture.F (Virudhunagar) provided more bulk density and 1000 grains weight.
Bagheri et al. (2013) studied that some physical and milling properties for
five varieties of rough rice namely, Tarom, Khazar, Fajr, Nemat and Neda were
determined. The results revealed that rough rice Nemat variety has the highest
mean length, width, equivalent diameter, grain volume and surface area. The
Tarom variety registered the lowest length, thickness, equivalent diameter and
volume while the maximum thickness belonged to Neda variety. The bulk density
of Neda was significantly different from the other four varieties. There was no
significant difference in the angle of repose among different varieties. In terms of
milling properties, there was a significant difference between some of the tested
paddies. The highest broken milled rice was obtained for Nemat variety and the
lowest was belonged to Fajr.
2.2 Milling Characteristics of Paddy
Thompson et al. (1990) Milling appraisal quality is based on head rice and
total rice obtained from the sample after milling. Head rice or head rice percentage
is the weight of head grain in the rice lot. Farooq et al. (2005) reported that whole
rice normally include broken grains that are above 75 per cent of whole kernel.
Thompson et al. (1990) indicated that maximum head rice yield ranges from 55 per
cent to 65 per cent. Whole rice yield is one of the most important criteria for
determining milling rice quality.
Suriyamoorthy et al. (1994) Husk content in 151 rice samples from Tamil
Nadu ranged from 18.1 to 26.3 per cent, length from 5.75 to 10.33 mm, breadth
from 2.10 to 3.53 mm, length: breadth from 1.81 to 4.10 and 1000-grain weight
from 10.24 to 30.33 g. The husk content was lower in coarse (20.8%) than in fine
(21.9%) and super fine (22.1%) cultivars. Breadth and weight were negatively
related to husk content.
Aracher et al. (1995) studied that the milling quality is affected by brown
rice temperature. Brown rice at initial temperature ranging from 0 to 250˚C was
milled for 15, 30, 45 or 60 sec. The result showed the head rice yield increases
from 25 to 100˚C at the standard 30 sec milling time.
Mutters (1998) reported that broken grains as milled rice with length less
than one quarter of the average length of the kernel. He found out that broken
grains normally have lower value than that of head rice. Broken grains cost less
than the whole grain. Varieties that produce more broken grains produce less
whole grains thereby reducing profits that should accrue from their sale. To
produce good quality milled rice, good quality paddy must be used.
Patindol (2000) indicated that the moisture content is a major factor
affecting the milling quality of rice. If the moisture content is too low or too high,
there will be a decline in the milling recovery and whole rice. Fan et al.( 2000)
reported that the length of rough rice affects its Head Rice Yield (HRY) which is
defined as the mass percentage of rough or unprocessed rice that remains as head
rice (equal to or greater than 3/4 intact kernels) after milling. The HRY reduction
of long and medium grain rice varieties was studied in relation to different
harvesting and drying conditions.
Bautista et al. (2002) revealed that the removal of bran as the milling
duration and grain moisture content increased resulted in linear reduction of whole
kernel yield. Belsnio (1980) that calculated milling degree based on the amount of
bran removed from the brown rice. In the milling process, the higher milling
degree indicates a smaller percentage of bran removed from the milled rice.
Farooq et al. (2005) reported the degree of milling is influenced by the
grain hardness, size and shape, depth of surface ridges, bran thickness and mill
efficiency. It also affects milling recovery and influences consumer acceptance.
The actual head rice percentage in a sample of milled rice will depend on varietal
characteristics, production factors, harvesting and the drying milling process.
However, harvesting, drying and milling can be responsible for some losses and
damage to the grain. Whole rice is expressed as a percentage of the paddy rice.
Shi-gang (2006) studied the relationship between the different moisture
content of brown rice and the energy consumption, the broken rice rate, the crack
rate and the Head Rice Yield (HRY). It could be concluded that the HRY increased
at first falls and then decreased along with the raise of moisture content (mc) and it
could reach the maximum value (70.78%) when mc was 15.5 per cent. The energy
consumption of rice milling decreased along with the increase of mc. The broken
rice rate fell at first and then increased along with the raise of mc and it could reach
the minimum value (4.28%) when the moisture content was 15.5 per cent.
Bergman et al. (2006) considered milling quality as one of the most
important aspects of rice grain quality. The edible part of rice grain is enclosed in
the glumes, which need to be first separated by milling. During milling, the hull is
removed from the rough rice using a huller to yield brown rice. Li (2003) described
the milling process as the removal of the hull from the paddy followed by the
removal of the embryo and bran layer from the brown rice through an abrasive mill
to produce total rice (broken and whole kernels). Khush et al. (1979) Total milling
yield includes the whole (head) rice and broken rice yield from total unclean rough
rice.
Pan et al. (2007) studied the effect of milling conditions on milling quality
of medium grain rough rice M202. This research examined the relationships
among the milled rice quality parameters, namely Total Rice Yield (TRY), Head
Rice Yield (HRY), Whiteness Index (WI), and Total Lipid Content (TLC). HRY
was more sensitive to changes in milling conditions than TRY. It decreased when
milling weight was increased. Milling weight and milling duration had more
influence on HRY than polishing weight and duration.
Anonymous (2009) reported that milling of rice increases its shelf life and
provides consumers with physical properties they desire. Therefore the goal of
milling is to remove as much of the colour bran and germ as possible. The quantity
of bran remaining on the surface of the grain after milling is defined as milling
degree. The degree of milling is a measure of the percent bran removed from the
brown rice kernel. Un-milled brown rice absorbs water poorly and does not cook
well. Indicated that high milling degree means that the milled rice is very white
with relatively light milling.
Anonymous (2009) milling recovery is the percentage of milled rice (total
rice yield) obtained from the sample of the paddy after milling. It can be computed
by dividing the weight of the milled or polished rice recovered by the weight of the
paddy sample used.
Eric (2010) studied the forty six rice varieties were evaluated for their seed
and grain quality. Grain length, length to width ratio and the thousand hulled and
milled rice grain weights were also determined. Based on the thousand hulled grain
weights, the varieties were categories into five ranges; 27 - 30 grams, 30 - 33
grams, 33 - 36 grams, 36 - 39 grams and above 39 grams. The hulled grain length
was classified into three, as very long 32, long 12 and medium 2. Using the data on
the length and length to width ratio of the milled rice grains, the varieties were
classified as extra long (33 varieties), long (12 varieties) and medium (1 variety).
They were further classified base on their length to width ratio as slender (27
varieties). The varieties performed differently during the milling test out of the
forty six varieties rice varieties tested for the milling performance, twenty nine
varieties were categorized as grade 1 among the head rice percentage varieties.
Farahmandfar et al. (2010) studied the Milling quality of 22 milled rice
varieties. Results obtained revealed that the Tarom Mahali and Champa varieties
have the highest head rice yield (HRY) and total milling recovery (MR). The
greatest degree of milling (DOM) value was found for the Haraz variety, it was
found that the husk removed percent values were not statistically different among
the varieties studied. Finally, considering all results obtained the varieties of Tarom
Mahali, Champa, and Neda showed to be more economical in the milling process.
Payakapol et al. (2010) studied the verify variations in chemical
compositions and physicochemical properties, through a Texture Profile Analysis
(TPA) and pasting properties of Jasmine rice after polishing at six different
Degrees of Milling (DOM). The DOM level significantly affected chemical
compositions. The process of polishing induced nutrient contents to decrease
further after bran layer was further removed. The physicochemical properties both
TPA and pasting properties of rice were also affected by the DOM. The degree of
gelatinization value of cooked rice was found to increase with the increase in DOM
level.
Lanning et al. (2011) studied the milling characteristics of two long-grain
pure line and four long-grain hybrid cultivars were compared. Rough rice samples
of each cultivar were conditioned to 12.5 per cent moisture content (mc), and
subsamples of four cultivars were conditioned to 10.5 per cent, 11.5 per cent, and
13.5 per cent mc in order to evaluate the effect of mc at time of milling. Samples
were milled for durations of 10, 20, 30, and 40 s. Hybrids generally reached a
target surface lipid content (SLC) in shorter durations than pure lines, and the
colour of hybrid head rice was generally whiter than pure line head rice after
milling for any duration. The rate of change in head rice yield (HRY) per unit
change in SLC varied among cultivars. Rice milled at greater mc exhibited lesser
SLC and greater rates of change in HRY with respect to SLC than rice milled at
lesser mc.
Shilpa (2011) studied the physicochemical characteristics such as physical,
chemical and cooking characteristics for studied collected 10 traditionally
cultivated rice varieties Among the varieties, the highest hulling was noted in
varieties Muno, Shiedi and lowest in varieties Bello and Kalo Damgo. The
Length/Breadth ratio ranged from 2.02 - 2.86. The lowest chalkiness was recorded
in variety Kalo Novan and highest in variety Korgut. Among the varieties studied,
the amylose content (AC) ranged from 14.6 - 23.7 per cent in variety Khochro and
Kalo Novan respectively. The gel consistency was highest in traditionally
cultivated rice variety Damgo and lowest in Khochro. The highest Kernel length
after cooking was recorded in Bello and minimum in variety Korgut.
Allameh et al. (2013) investigated the effect of various drying dates on
milling recovery Head Rice Yield (HRY). HRY was a commonly accepted
standard for measuring rice milling quality. The experiments were conducted on
five different dates of 0, 15, 30, 60, and 90 days after harvesting and two long
grains Hashemi and Khazar. The results revealed that cultivars and drying dates
had significant (p<0.01) effects on head rice yield. Head rice yield for Hashemi
had a decreasing trend under delayed drying dates.
2.3 Cooking Characteristics of Rice
Ali et al. (1977) reported that parboiled rice gives higher swelling index as
compared to raw rice of the same variety for the same degree of softness of the
cooked rice. The parboiled rice takes more time for cooking.
Pushpamma and Reddy (1979) studied the changes in quality of rice and
Jowar stored up to one year in three different agro climatic region of Andhra
Pradesh. Improvement in cooking quality of rice was found only after six months
of storage.
Agrawal (1984) studied the effect of storage on the quality parameter of
rice. The cooking quality tests showed that water uptake of stored sample increased
slightly with increase in storage period. Leaching of solids during cooking was
found to be decrease with storage period.
Chaubey et al. (1988) reported that many factors which determine the
cooking quality amylose are important. Elongation ratio is another parameter of
cooking test. On comparing average elongation of the scented and non- scented
rice varieties, non-scented rice grains had a lesser elongation ratio than the scented
type.
Kumari and Padmavathi (1991) evaluated cooking qualities of twenty
varieties of milled paddy samples by physical and chemical characteristics and
palatability evaluation. Kernel dimension did not correlate significantly with the
chemical characteristics. Palatability evaluation showed that short grain varieties
had better palatability scores than long grain varieties. Significant correlations
were found among some of the physico-chemical characteristics and the latter with
palatability evaluations.
Islam et al. (2003) determined the effect of processing conditions on
cooking qualities of parboiled rice. The experimental results showed that not only
cooking conditions but also drying conditions greatly affected the hardness of
parboiled grains. In particular, moisture migration during drying related to the final
m.c. and the drying period itself were significant in the hardening characteristics of
parboiled grains.
Singh et al. (2005) revealed that Pusa Basmati-1 and IET 13548 (semi
dwarf) recorded significantly higher grain quality traits comparable to Taraori
Basmati. However; IET 13548 recorded maximum values of grain elongation ratio
and volumes expansion (4.25).
2.4 Physicochemical Properties of Rice
Reddy et al. (1993) studied the Fine Structure of Rice Starch Amylopectin
and its Relation to the Texture of Cooked. Starches derived from 20 rice varieties
containing from very low to very high total and hot-water-insoluble amylose-
equivalent (AE) were fractionated by gel-permeation chromatography (GPC).
Hettiarachchya et al. (1996) studied the physicochemical properties of
three rice varieties. Textural properties of gels from La Grue, Bengal, and S201,
were investigated using the Universal Texture Analyzer, and pasting characteristics
by Brabender Visco/amylography. Gels from La Grue (long grain) had higher
fiacturability, hardness, amylographic consistency, and setback viscosity (P<O.
05). Gels from S201, a short grain variety, were harder and had higherfiacturability
values than Those from Bengal, a medium grain variety. Analysis of texture
profiles of rice gels could be an alternative to Brabender viscoamylographs for
diferentiating among rice varieties. Tests on in-vitro starch digestibility showed
that La Grue had lower maltose released than S201 or Bengal during the first 15
and 45 min of hydrolysis with human salivaly a-amylase.
Leon and Barber (1997) studied the firming of starch gels and amylopectin
retrogradation as related todextrin production by a-amylase. The effect of dextrins
produced by a-amylaseon the firming and amylopectin retrogradation of wheat
starch gels was studied. Different gel samples were prepared and included several
ingredients, for example, a-amylase, vital gluten and glucoamylase. Amylopectin
retrogradation, gel firming and the dextrin profile were analysed throughout a 5-
day storage period. Both processes, i.e. firming and starch retrogradation, increased
with time, and were not affected by the incorporation of gluten into the mixture.
The well-known effect of a-amylase to retard bread crumb firming was also found
to be relevant to starch gels. From the results obtained in this work, it seems that
this anti-firming effect is not due to modifications of the starch but to dextrins
produced by starch hydrolysis, since the effect did not occur when dextrins were
removed by glucoamylase.
Bhattacharya et al. (2004) studied the effects of different treatments on
physic-chemical properties of rice starch. The physic-chemical property of rice
starch depends on the gelatinization of starch under different treatments. Three
different gelatinization process were performed-boiling in water, steaming and
enzymatic digestion. The effects of gelatinization on viscoelastic property of rice
starch were measured by Instron Texture Analyser.
Mahanta and Bhattacharya (2009) studied the relationship of starch changes
to puffing expansion of parboiled rice. ‘Intan’ variety of paddy (Oryza sativa) was
tested for puffing. It was parboiled under a wide range of paddy moisture content,
steaming pressure and time, as also temperature and time of sand heating. The
resulting milled rices were studied for their diverse properties including puffing.
Indices of starch changes in the samples were calculated as: (1) gelatinisation
index from the solubility of amylose in 0.2 N KOH; (2) amylopectin retrogradation
from the post-production drop in room-temperature hydration power of the
parboiled paddy during air-drying, (3) thermal breakdown of starch from the drop
in gel permeation chromatographic fraction I of starch; lipid-amylose complexation
indirectly from (4) drop in rate of water uptake during cooking and (5) cooked-
ricefirmness. It was found that the puffing expansion was very highly correlated
with the combined above 5 indices of starch changes, as much as 90% of the
variation in puffing being explainable on that basis. Puffing was promoted by
gelatinization as well as lipid-amylose complexation, but was retarded by
amylopectin retrogradation and probably starch breakdown.
Chitra et al. (2009) studied the effect of processing paddy on digestibility
of rice starch by in vitro studies. Paddy (Oryza sativa L) (variety ‘IR – 64’), was
parboiled, puffed by sand roasting and flaked by edge runner and roller flaker and
variations in physical and physicochemical properties were studied. Moisture
contents were lower (5.8–10.8%) in processed rice products compared to raw
materials (11.8%). Ratio of rice to sand in the case of puffed rice preparation was
optimized. The equilibrium moisture content was 27.4% in raw rice while it was
much higher (38.9–81.0%) in processed rice. Sedimentation volume was lowest
(6.2 ml) in raw rice and highest (18.8 ml) in popped rice. Starch content was 84.8
and 76.5–83% in raw and processed rice, respectively. In vitro starch digestibility
was highest in roller flaker flakes and lowest in raw milled rice. Among the ready
to eat products, popped rice showed least starch digestibility (~30%).
Daomukda et al. (2011) studied the effect of cooking methods on
physicochemical properties of brown rice. This aimed to compare the chemical
compositions and physicochemical properties of Jasmine brown rice (Oryza sativa
cultivar Kao Dok Mali 105). Brown rice was cooked by various cooking methods,
namely electric cooker, microwave oven, steaming, and conventional method. The
results indicated that the conventional cooking method significantly reduced
protein and fat content. The lowest degree of gelatinization was observed in rice
cooked by steaming method. The water to rice ratio of 2:1 showed significantly
higher on the hardness, chewiness, and cohesiveness, but lower on the degree of
gelatinization than those of other cooking methods.
Jambamma et al. (2011) conducted some engineering properties of pearled
sorghum grain, moisture content (db), colour, water activity, bulk density, porosity,
true density, sphericity, geometric mean diameter, hardness, angle of repose,
coefficient of friction. Biochemical analysis of sample was conducted to study the
key properties such as carbohydrates, protein, fat, curd fibre and ash content to
know nutritional constituencies of product and its suitability for human
consumption.
Shifeng yu et al. (2012) evaluated the amylase content of starches and
flours from different rice cultivars differed significantly. The results showed that
the physicochemical properties of rice starch and rice flour were correlated to
amylase content. The crystallinity degree of rice starch and flour dependend on
amylase content. The blue value, turbidity value, and gel hardness were positively
correlated to amylose content; howerever, the swelling power, solubility, and gel
adhesiveness were negatively correlated to amylase content. Furthermore, the
pasting properties and gel textural and retrogradation properties of rice flours were
related to the structure properties of rice starch. And the characteristics of starch,
protein, and lipid significantly influenced the turbidity, pasting properties, and gel
textural and retrogradation properties of rice flours.
Oko et al. (2012) studied the rice cooking quality and physico-chemical
characteristics: a comparative analysis of selected local and newly introduced rice
varieties in Ebonyi State, Nigeria. They assessed the cooking quality and physico-
chemical characteristics of 15 selected indigenous and five newly introduced
hybrid rice varieties grown in Ebonyi State, Nigeria. Significant variation (P<0.05)
was detected among the 20 rice varieties for all the traits evaluated. The results
showed that all the five newly introduced hybrid rice varieties do not swell
appreciably during cook-ing. The grains of Cv.“China” had the highest elongation
values of 3.2 ± 0.00 mm. “E4197” has the best physical appearance but easily
dissolves in water during cooking. Most of the physico-chemical characteristic
such as amylose, amylopectin, gel consistency and gelatinization temperature were
significantly correlated (positively or negatively) with some of the cooking quality
traits (elongation during cooking, solids in cooking water and optimum cooking
time), indicating that efforts aimed at selecting rice varieties with improved
cooking quality traits would warrant a consideration of the physico-chemical
attributes of the rice grain. The overall cooking quality and physico-chemical
attributes of some of the indigenous rice varieties were even relatively better than
the newly introduced hybrid varieties. Farmers should, therefore, be critical in
accepting new varieties that may not be comparably outstanding in cooking quality
and physico-chemical characteristics. in order to pre-serve the integrity of the all-
cherished indigenous rice varieties.
Jeevetha et al. (2014) conducted the relationship between amylose content
and glycemic index of commonly consumed white rice. Two types of white rice
commonly consumed by Malaysians and determine its relationship with the
glycemic index (GI) value. The two samples of rice namely White Rice 5% Broken
(WR5%) and Fragrant White Rice (FWR). Nutrient compositions of the rice were
analyzed. Amylose content of the rice was determined using colorimetric assay.
The GI values of the rice were determined using a standardized protocol. Both
types of rice had comparable nutrient composition. The amylose content of the
WR5% (12.5±0.4%) was comparable to FWR (11.6±0.5%), as the difference was
not significant. GI value of FWR (124±16.4) appeared to be comparable to the
WR5% (87±14.4), as the difference was not significant. This study may show that
white rice categorized as low amylose may have high GI value. Key words:
Amylose content, Glycemic Index, white rice.
2.5 Pre-treatment (parboiling) of Paddy
Chattopadhyay et al. (1986) determined a minimum hydrothermal
treatment for packaged parboiled rice that restored fissured grains, eliminated
grains with opaque cores, and imparted minimum colour. They studied various
treatments of hot soaking 60°C, 65°C, and 70°C and steaming 103.51 kPa gauge
times with Brazos (medium-grain), Labelle, and Skybonnet (long grain) varieties
and found that the optimum combination of treatments depended on variety.
Agrawal et al. (1989) studied on a laboratory scale (cv. Labelle) and on a
pilot plant scale (cv. Tebonnet) indicated that parboiling through steaming alone
was possible for high moisture rice (25.09-25.54 % wb) but not for low moisture
rice (11.80 % wb). Translucency was a good indicator of the extent of
gelatinization, whereas peak viscosity and colour were good indicators of the
degree of gelatinization.
Otegbayo (2001) studied those two varieties of local rice in paddy. The rice
was divided into halves, one half was processed by Parboiling, drying and milling,
the other half was processed by drying and milling only. The result from the study
showed that parboiling affected the physico-chemical qualities of the rice varieties.
There were differences in the physical dimension, appearance, colour, water
absorption, cooking time, amylose, protein, fat and carbohydrate contents of the
parboiled and non-parboiled rice samples. Parboiling reduced the breakage, fat,
protein and amylose content of the rice while the cooking time, water uptake and
thiamine contents were increased. Parboiling means way of improving vitamin
content and milling properties of rice.
Mohanty et al. (2002) parboiling is a pre-milling hydrothermal treatment
that brings about considerable physical, chemical and physic-chemical
modifications in rice. The soaking temperature and pressure and pressure and
steaming pressure greatly influenced the moisture absorption by the grain, thus
affected the time requirement.
Kositphantawong et al. (2004) study the effect of soaking time and
temperature on the quality of parboiled rice using superheated steam fluidization
technique. Paddy was soaked for 3 - 5 h at temperature of 80 - 90°C. The moisture
content of paddy after soaking was 35 -45 per cent (db). After drying, the moisture
content of paddy was reduced to 16 - 25 per cent (db). Bed height of 10 cm,
superheated-steam temperature of 150°C, steam pressure of 106.1 kPa and steam
velocity of 3.8 m/s were use in the drying process. The experimental results
indicated that increasing soaking time and temperature resulted in higher head rice
yield, whilst rice whiteness and white belly decreased with increasing drying time.
Islam et al. (2004) studied the effect of parboiling on some important
quality indicators of parboiling rice and reported that parboiling of paddy at higher
temperature and longer steaming periods would result in severe deformation of the
grain along with exudation of endosperm from absorbing excess moisture and husk
splitting. The deformed grain loses part of it during milling along with the exuded
part of the endosperm. As a result, parboiling of paddy at higher temperature and
longer steaming periods reduced milling yield for the steaming temperature of
90°C, about 4.0 per cent more milling yield was obtained for steaming time greater
than 20 min than the untreated sample. In case of 100°C increased yield was about
9.5 per cent and 7.5 per cent for the steaming periods of 5 - 20 min respectively
and then decreased rapidly.
Igathinathane et al. (2005) studied the combined soaking procedure for
parboiling of rough rice was developed based on the gelatinization temperature of
rice starch to achieve rapid completion of soaking. Medium-grain rough rice
variety ‘Pankaj’ was selected for the study. Soaking characteristics of rough rice
were studied at 60°C, 70°C, and 80°C. Below the gelatinization temperature,
soaking proceeded in the normal way; however, above the gelatinization
temperature, excessive water absorption, husk splitting, actual cooking of rice
kernels and loss of quality due to soak water contamination were observed. The
combination soaking procedure, involving 80°C water as the first stage until an
intermediate moisture content of 35.0% db followed by 70°C as the second stage
up to the saturation moisture content of 42.7% db resulted in a 67% time reduction
when compared with single-stage soaking at 70°C. Rice from the combination
procedure resembled that obtained from 70°C single-stage soaking in all respects.
In milling analysis, after parboiling the rough rice from both soaking methods, the
polished rice did not show any difference in terms of head rice yield, broken grains
produced, and cracked grains produced.
Thakur et al. (2006). During soaking, the rice kernels leach soluble
materials and may burst, which often changes the colour of the kernels. These
changes are affected by soaking time and temperature.
Naik et al. (2006) evaluate effect of parboiling on the postharvest
characteristics (hulling, milling and head rice recovery) .Milling characteristics
were analysed for both raw and parboiled paddy. Studies revealed that three
hybrids, i.e. DRRH-1, ADTRH-1 and PA-6201, possessed intermediate Amylose
Content (AC). There was not much difference between hybrids and the control
cultivar in hulling and milling recovery characteristics. On the other hand, mean
Head Rice Recovery (HRY) of hybrids lower than that of the control cultivar. The
results revealed that parboiling increased HRY of hybrids. This process reduced
Amylose Content.
Sareepuang et al. (2008) investigated the effect of soaking temperature on
physical, chemical and cooking properties of parboiled rice. The 12-month stored
KDML 105 paddy samples were soaked at 40, 50 and 60°C for 3 h, then
autoclaved with steam at 121°C 15 min and dried by cabinet tray dryer at 60°C to
reach the moisture content of 23 g/100 g dry matter. Head milling yield was
significantly increased from 51 per cent in brown rice to 60-80 per cent in
parboiled rice. The results also showed that parboiling process significantly
(p<0.05) increased protein, lipid and ash contents. Overall, soaking at 50°C for 3 h
prior to steaming and drying was found to provide the most desirable quality of
parboiled rice.
Tirawanichakul et al. (2008) investigate the change of quality of short grain
parboiled rice for different processing conditions. Physical properties involve head
rice yield, yellowness value and white belly affecting by parboiling rice
preparation. For producing parboiled rice processing conditions, soaking the rough
rice at 70°C for 1-3h, the steaming time was varied between 20 and 40 min for
95°C. In the drying step, parboiled rice were dried with 1000 W of infrared
radiation at 90°C to remove moisture from the initial moisture content (mc) of
parboiled rice was in range of 40 - 60% db. Until obtain the final mc was about
16% db. The results showed that increase soaking time and steaming time from 1-
3h and 20-30 min, respectively result in improve head rice yield and decrease the
white belly from parboiled grains and found that white belly disappear when
soaking at 70°C for 3h and steam 30 min. However yellowness value was similar
at all condition.
Parnsakhorn et al. (2008) studied parboiling of brown rice with the initial
moisture content (mc) of 13±1 per cent (wb) was soaked at two different initial
soaking temperatures of 70 and 80˚C. The soaking time was 1h, 2h, 3h and 4h,
followed by steaming at temperature of 100˚C for 10, 15 and 20 min. The samples
were then shade dried at 30±1˚C and 60±5 per cent RH to a final mc of 13±1 per
cent (wb). Results revealed that the head rice yield, colour, cooking time and
hardness of parboiled brown rice were decreased whereas whiteness and water
absorption were increased. Qualitatively, parboiled brown rice showed
intermediate values between milled rice and commercial parboiled paddy. Head
rice yield was lower for parboiled brown rice when compared to that of parboiled
paddy but greater than the head rice yield of non-parboiled rice.
Han et al. (2008) studied the brown rice kernels (japonica type) were
soaked in water at different temperatures (25 or 50°C) before cooking to a
moisture content of 20 or 30 per cent. Soaked brown rice was cooked in either the
soaking water (SW) or in Distilled Water (DW) (rice solids to water ratio 1:1.4).
When the soaking temperature was higher (50°C vs. 25°C), water absorption and
starch leaching were greater. To reach 20 per cent moisture, the rice required 1h of
soaking at 50°C but 2h of soaking at 25°C. Both the moisture content of the soaked
rice and the soaking temperature affected the texture of the cooked brown rice. The
soaking temperature and moisture content of the rice kernels also affected the
digestive properties of the cooked rice.
Kashaninezhad et al. (2008) studied the water absorption behaviour of three
varieties of rice (Fajr, Neda and Shafagh). Physical properties (dimensions,
geometric mean diameter, volume and sphericity), bulk density, kernel density and
porosity of rice varieties were also evaluated as a function of soaking temperature
in the range of 25-70°C. The results showed that the soaking temperature had great
effect on the soaking behaviour of rice varieties. We found that the water
absorption increased when the soaking temperature increased and the soaking time
decreased with increase in soaking temperature. The bulk density and of rice was
found to decrease to less value at soaking temperature of 40°C and increase from
there to maximum value at soaking temperature of 70°C. The kernel density of rice
was found to increase to maximum value at soaking temperature of 40°C and
decrease from there to minimum value at soaking temperature of 70°C. Porosity
changes of rice varieties followed a similar pattern during soaking process and
after increasing at soaking temperature of 40°C, decreased to minimum value at
soaking temperature of 70°C.
Widowatia et al. (2010) studied the reducing glycemic index of some rice
varieties using parboiling process. A research aimed to reduce the glycemic index
(GI) of rice using parboiling process and evaluate the nutritional quality of
parboiled rice. The basic processes of parboiled rice included rough rice steeping
in water at 60°C for 4 hours, steaming for 20 minutes, first drying at 100°C and
moisture content of 18-20 per cent, and second drying at 60ºC and moisture
content of 12 percent. Results showed that parboiling process increased rice
amylose content and dietary fiber content. But reduced in vitro starch digestibility.
Parboiling process also reduced the glycemic index of rice. Oludare et al. (2012)
studied the effect of processing parameters on physical properties of Nigeria local
rice (Ofada) was evaluated and optimised using D-optimal of response surface
methodology. The independent variables were soaking duration 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5
days and parboiling temperatures 100, 110 and 120°C, while responses include
Head Rice Yield, brokenness, chalkiness, Thousand Grain Weight, sphericity,
length, breadth and width. Soaking duration and parboiling temperatures
significantly influenced the dependent variables at p<0.05. Optimum soaking and
parboiling were put at 2 days: 6hrs and 119°C.
Cherati et al. (2012) studied the author has purposed parboiling that a
decrease of rice broken percentage and at the beginning selected paddy of variety
of rice Tarom and soaked at three different temperatures 45, 65 and 80°C orderly
for 5, 4 and 1.5h to moisture of 40 per cent, respectively and then in steaming stage
to operate these action two steaming methods are selected steaming under pressure
condition and steaming in atmosphere pressure and in the first method after
exerting air, the steam pressure is increase to 1 kg/cm² which is done in two
different duration times of 2.5 and 5 min and in sec method used of three times of
5, 10 and 15 min and dry to 8 per cent moisture and the result found rice broken
percentage and bran percentage is decreases and increases yield percentage in
variety of Tarom.
Tirawanichakul et al. (2012) studied the effect of infrared and hot air
drying conditions on drying kinetics of Leb Nok Pattani (LNP) rice and
Suphanburi 1 (SP 1) parboiled rice and their qualities was studied. Initial moisture
content for LNP and SP 1 rice was 54±1 and 49±1 per cent dry-basis, respectively.
The results show that hot air and infrared parboiled rice drying can maintain high
head rice yield and infrared drying with 1.5 kW provided the highest head rice
yield value. Additionally, the qualities analysis showed that whiteness, water
absorption, cooking time and pasting property were significantly different
compared to reference samples.
Ayamdoo et al. (2013) studied that conducted to ascertain the ideal
parboiling condition that optimizes the physical qualities of rice. Two rice varieties
(Nerica 14 and Jasmine 85) were parboiled in the Laboratory at four different
conditions (soaking and steaming time combinations) to ascertain the effects of
each parboiling condition on the physical qualities of the parboiled rice. A
combination of four soaking times 6, 20, 24 and 36 h and three steaming levels 40,
60 and 90 min. The parboiled rice were milled and physical properties such as
milling yield, Head Rice Yield (HRY), colour, hardness, broken percentage,
translucency and gelatinization temperature were evaluated. The results showed
that parboiling at 20 to 24h soaking with 60 min of steaming produced rice with
best physical qualities except for colour. Also results showed that soaking and
steaming time have direct impact on the final quality of parboiled rice.
2.6 Puffing/Popping Characteristics of Parboiled Milled Rice
Kelkar et al. (1994) found that puffing enhanced the digestibility, as against
the decrease in case of flaking. The data on the extent of starch gelatinization in
puffed products from rice such as lahi (puffed paddy), poha (beaten rice),
murmura (puffed rice) and chiwda (puffed poha) indicated that gelatinization was a
pre-requisite for puffing and also for increase in digestibility. Nevertheless,
gelatinization is not the only factor in enhancing digestibility of puffed products.
Kanchana and Neelakantan (1994) concluded that formulated puffed soya
snack provided 40 per cent protein, 19.0 per cent fat, and 420 kcal/100 g product,
and puffing process reduced beany flavor and bitter taste in addition to the
elimination of flatus compounds. The crisp and tasty puffed soya was found to be
well accepted. Also puffed soya can be introduced as a protein-rich snack food,
and as a substitute for other costly nuts.
Hoke et al. (2005) studied the optimum conditions of rice puffing. Paddy
was cleaned and dried to 12–13% of moisture (w.b.) in air flow or in the shadow or
sunshine, or in the vacuum chamber containing a desiccative substance, or by hot
air in the drying chamber. Dry rice was placed into metal containers and stored in
laboratory at room temperature or chilled (at 4–5°C). The treatment of rice
involved wetting in hot water for some time to reach the moisture content of about
30%. Water was then removed and the wetted paddy was cooked in steam (steam
treatment) or heated in sand (dry heat process). The final effect of the treatment
depends on the steam pressure and the duration of the steam treatment. After the
treatment, rice was dried to the moisture content optimum for puffing (10.5–14%).
Then rice was milled to some milling degree (minimum milling degree 6%). An
increase of the expansion ratio was reached by salting or alcohol treatment. The
salting can be done by wetting rice in the salt solution of specific concentration for
a specific time followed by drying to the moisture convenient for puffing, or by a
thorough mixing of saturated salt solution with treated milled rice.
Kumar and Prasad (2013) studied the effect of paddy parboiling and rice
puffing on physical, optical and aerodynamic characteristics. The roasted form of
rice as puffed rice may thus also be considered as prebiotic foods apart from the
conventional and nutritious low cost easily reach food to masses. Therefore,
attempts have made for the preparation of puffed rice from the use of commercially
important medium slender paddy genotype, Gurjari taken as raw material. The
expansion ratio was found in the range of 2.08 to 2.43 in the dimensional
parameters. The increase in the surface area was found to be 5.01times that of the
raw rice leaving the aspect ratio and sphericity unaltered, which is the indicator
that the rice is puffed in all the dimension uniformly. The puffed rice has showed
lighter optical colour with Lab value as 76.33, 0.66 and 0.33. The terminal velocity
under the study of aerodynamic property showed, puffed rice could float with a
very low air flow rate of 0.78 ms-1.
2.7 Flaking Characteristics of Cereals
A popular form of ready-to-eat breakfast cereal is the crisp flake. Breakfast
cereal manufacture was originally an art, and quite proprietary, with relatively few
publications except for patents (Daniels, 1974). Number of different processes are
used in the preparation of ready-to-eat cereals including flaking, puffing,
shredding, and granule formation of wheat, corn and rice, but none of sorghum
(Kent, 1983). The studies on flaking of sorghum are limited and hence citations
from rice and maize are given.
According to Ananthachar (1982) soaking of paddy in water, roasting in
hot sand and tempering followed by flaking in edge-runner were found to be
optimal for flaking of rice. Narasimha et al. (1982) developed a continuous process
for making rice flakes from paddy. Shankara et al. (1984) found that the small
roller flaker with the edgerunner will facilitate fine flaking of coarse flakes and
increase the yield of rice flakes.
Sukhonchun-Sringam and Chumsai-Silawanit (1982) prepared flakes from
cooked corn grits by pair of rollers usually used for wheat noodles sheeting and
evaluated for the acceptability. Moisture content in flaked corn was reduced before
deep fat frying. Their results showed that plain, sugar frosted and powder sugar
coated flakes were all well acceptable. Simon Food Engineers Ltd (1985) utilized
fine maize grits (250 Pm size) as raw material for the preparation of quality maize
flakes.
Fast (1987) reported an overview of cereal flaking process including
description of the preparation of cooked grits or pellets for flaking. Fast et al.
(1990) discussed the process by which cooked and tempered grits or extruded
pellets are made into thin flakes that were toasted into crisp golden-brown corn
flakes, wheat flakes or rice flakes. Papotto et al. (1990) reported the development
and quality evaluation of extrusion cooked corn-buck wheat ready-to-eat flakes.
Chigumira (1988) discussed the preparation of extrusion cooked ready-to-
eat maisoy-sorghum puffed flakes using Brady extruder. In the high protein ready-
to-eat maisoy-sorghum puffed flakes, sorghum levels above 20 per cent gave a
product with a gritty texture, unacceptable color and flavor and limited expansion.
Lu and Walker (1988) developed a process for making ready-to-eat
breakfast flakes from grain sorghum flour using simple and low technology
process. Sensory evaluation and consumer study of these flakes indicated that they
were palatable and acceptable to many people.
Sailaja (1992) studied the popping and flaking quality of sorghum cultivars
in relation to physicochemical characteristics and in vitro starch and protein
digestibility. The objective of this study was to develop/improve the sorghum
popping and flaking processes and to study the popping and flaking quality of 20
sorghum cultivars. In relation to their grain characteristics, in vitro starch and
protein digestibility. There were significant genotypic differences among cultivars
for popping and flaking quality. In vitro starch and protein digestibility of grain
showed variation among the cultivars. Popping and flaking caused a shift in protein
and starch digestibilities of the grain. A five- fold increase in starch digestibility
was observed in both the processes. However, heat processing had a deleterious
effect on protein digestibility which is more pronounced in flaked products. Taste
panel evaluation showed significant variation among cultivars for all the sensory
qualities of pops. In flakes the color and appearance, and texture showed
significant variation among cultivars. Physicochemical characters of grain such as
bulk density, floaters percent, endosperm texture, a~nylose content showed strong
association wth the popping and flaklng quality. Swelllng power, solubility of
starch, pasting temperature and viscosity of flour also showed significant
relationship with the popplng and flaking quality parameters.
Mujoo et al. (1997) studied the effect of roasting of soaked paddy rice and
its subsequent flaking during production of rice flakes on solubility of rice proteins
in various solvents was investigated. The solvents were so chosen to provide an
understanding of the type of protein–protein interactions occurring during
processing. There was an increase in protein solubility upon roasting of soaked
paddy in fine hot sand (175–250°C) a prelude to the flaking process–however,
after subsequent flaking solubility decreased. Gel filtration studies indicated that
aggregates with molecular weights greater than 4´107kDa formed during flaking as
a result of disulphide bonding. The aggregates were composed of 68, 31–34 and
24kDa proteins. Of these, the 31–34kDa proteins were identified as ‘putative
prolamins’.
2.8 Sensory Evaluation of Flakes and Puffed Cereals
Iles and Elsen (1972) found a high correlation between textural preferences
and sensory crispness, indicating that the acceptability of a food's texture increased
with increasing crispness. Sensory evaluation and consumer study of flakes
prepared from grain sorghum flour indicated that they were palatable and
acceptable to many people (Lu and Walker, 1988).
Vickers (1983) observed that crispness was closely associated with the
pleasantness of biting sounds. Vickers (1985) have used a bite test cell in an
Instron Universal Testing Machine to determine the force–deformation behaviour
of eight ready-to-eat breakfast cereals and potato chips. Seymour (1985) used a
Kramer shear cell in an Instron to crush samples of several dry crisp foods altered
in crispness by humidification. The measurements of peak force, slope and area
under the force-deformation curve had small negative correlations with sensory
crispness (Vickers 1987).
CHAPTER-III
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The work was carried out in the Department of Agricultural Processing and
Food Engineering, Faculty of Agricultural Engineering and Department of Plant
Physiology, Bio-Chemistry, Medicinal & Aromatic Plants and Department of
Genetics and Plant Breeding, College of Agriculture and, IGKV, Raipur (C.G.)
The first section of this chapter deals with some physical properties of
paddy grains, rice, puffed rice and flaked rice. This section also includes milling
characteristics of paddy i.e. hulling and milling efficiency etc. The second section
deals with the different pre-treatments (parboiling i.e. soaking, steaming and
drying, roasting, puffing and flaking) on the processing of selected paddy varieties
are used. The third section deals with the quality analysis of all processed products
of different varieties of paddy grains.
3.1 Preparation of Samples
The three varieties of paddy Mahamaya, Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha
collected from I.G.K.V. University, Raipur were manually cleaned to remove all
foreign materials such as dust, dirt, small broken and immature kernels and stored
in polythene bags. The moisture contents of each variety were determined.
3.2 Experimental Design
Experiments were conducted to measure the physical, chemical, milling,
parboiling, puffing and flaking characteristic of paddy varieties, viz, Mahamaya,
Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha. Along with the three varieties of paddy, the
moisture content ranged from 11.39 - 13% (wb) were taken to study the
characteristics.
3.3 Physical Methods
3.3.1 Measurement of moisture content
Sample of 5g was measured into a petri dish by electrical balance and kept
in digital air oven at 105˚C for 24 hr to remove moisture from sample. After
drying, the dish is cooled in desiccators at room temperature for 15-20 min. and the
sample is weighted accurately to determine loss in weight due to removal of
moisture (Ban and Susawa, 1973). The moisture content was calculated using
following equation:
MCwb(%) =Weight of water in the sample
Total weight of the sample× 100 … . .3.1
Where,
MCwb= Moisture content (wet basis), %.
Fig.3.1: Measurement of moisture content by hot air oven.
3.3.2 Dimensions
100 grains were randomly selected and their three principle dimensions
(length, width and thickness) were measured using a venire calliper to an accuracy
of 0.01 cm. Length (L) is defined as the distance from the tip cap to the kernel
crown. Width (W) is defined as the widest point to point measurement taken
parallel to the face of the kernel. Thickness (T) is defined as the distance between
the two kernel faces.
(a) Mahamaya (b) Rajeshwari (c) Dokra Mecha
Fig. 3.2:Paddy seeds used for puffing and flaking.
3.3.3 Geometric mean diameter (De)
The geometric mean diameter (De) was calculated by using the following
relationship (Mohsenin,1986).
De = (LWT)1 3⁄ … . . (3.2)
Where,
L = Largest intercept, mm;
W= Width, mm;
T = Thickness, mm.
3.3.4 Sphericity (Sp)
Sphericity defines the ratio of the diameter of a sphere of the same volume
as that of the particle and the diameter of the smallest circumscribing sphere or
generally the largest diameter of the particle (Sahay and Singh, 1994). This
parameter shows the shape character of paddy seeds relative to the sphere having
the same volume.
Sphericity = √Volume of the particle
volume of circumdsribed sphere
= (LWT)1 3⁄
L× 100 … … . ( 3.3 )
Where,
L = largest intercept (length), mm;
W= width, mm;
T = Thickness, mm.
3.3.5 Surface area
The surface area (Sa) of paddy was calculated using the relationship given
by McCabe et al. (1986)
Sa = πDe2 (3.4)
Where,
Sa = Surface area, mm2;
De = Geometric mean diameter, mm.
3.3.6 Mass of paddy seeds
The 1000 grain mass was determined by selecting different lots of 1000
sound grains by counting from general lot, weighing them using electronic balance.
The average value of 3 replications was taken.
Fig. 3.3: Measurement the weight of paddy seeds by electronic balance
3.3.7 Bulk density
Bulk density was determine by filling sample in a measuring cylinder upto
150 ml and weight the sample by the help of electronic balance. The ratio of a
weight of the sample and volume occupied by it is expressed as the bulk density,
g/ml.
ρb =W
V . . … (3.5)
Where,
ρb = Bulk density, g/ml;
W = Weight of sample, g;
V = Volume of sample, ml.
Fig. 3.4: Measurement of bulk density of paddy seeds.
3.3.8 True density of paddy
True density was determined by the toluene displacement method. Sample
(about 5 g) was submerged in toluene in a measuring cylinder having an accuracy
of 0.1 ml, The increase in volume due to sample was noted as true volume of
sample which was then used to determine the true density of the sample.
ρt =M
S … . . (3.6)
Where,
ρt= True density, g/ml;
M = Mass of sample, g;
V = Solid volume occupied, ml.
3.3.9 Porosity (ε)
The porosity was computed from the values of the true density and bulk
density using the relationship given by (Mohsenin et al., 1970) as follows:
ɛ =𝜌𝑡 − 𝜌𝑏
𝜌𝑡× 100 … . . (3.7)
Where,
ρt = True density,g/ml;
ρb = Bulk density,g/ml.
3.3.10 Aspect ratio (Ra)
The aspect ratio, of paddy was determined by using equation
Ra =W
L × 100 … … . (3.8)
Where,
L = largest intercept (length), mm;
W= width, mm;
3.3.11 Angle of repose
The angle of repose (φ) considered as the angle in degrees with the
horizontal at which the material will stand forming a heap, was determined using
relationship:
Ø = tan−1 [2H
D] … … . . (3.9)
Where,
Ø = Angle of repose, degree;
H = Height of heap, cm;
D = Diameter of circular plate, cm;
3.3.12 Static coefficient of friction
The static coefficient of friction (μ) was determined for four structural
materials namely glass, plywood, rubber and galvanized steel sheet. A top and
bottomless metallic box was put on the surface. The box was filled by kernels
(nuts). The surface was gradually raised by the screw. Both horizontal and vertical
height values were measured using a ruler and digital caliper when the seeds
started sliding over the surface and, the coefficient of static frication was calculated
using the following Equation (Amin et al. 2004).
µ=tan(α) … (3.10)
Where,
µ=Static coefficient of friction;
α=Angle in degree.
3.4 Determine of milling characteristics
Milling was done in the Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding
Laboratory in, IGKV, Raipur Chhattisgarh. Only sound grains were used for the
experiment. The moisture content (mc) of the various samples was determined
using the digital moisture meter before milling. The initial moisture of the samples
was 11.39 - 12 per cent (wb). Hundred grams of the paddy of each varietiy were
de-husked using a rubber roll Satake testing husker. Rice and husk was obtained
after dehusking. The Satake abrasive whitener was used to polish the rice for one
minute to obtain the white rice (milling yield). A standard mesh was used to
separate the grains above 3/4th grain size are considered as the head rice, size in
the range ½ to 3/4th size were graded as course broken, between 1/4th and 1/2th
were termed as medium brokens and below 1/4th size are termed as the fine
brokens. In the presence course of investigation, the grading was done by hand.
The weights obtained were recorded after each operation. The weights were used
to determine the Hulling and Milling characteristics, Head Rice Percentage (HRR),
Broken Rice Percentage (BRP).
3.4.1 Hulling percentage
Hulling percentage of rice not depend only upon the efficiency of hulling
equipments but also upon other factors like drying, storage and characteristics of
paddy variety. The hulling percentage (HP) is calculated by the following formula
HP (%) =Ha
Hb × 100 … . (3.11)
Where,
HP=Hulling percentage (%);
Ha= Weight of rice after hulling, (g);
Hb= Weight of paddy before hulling, (g).
3.4.2 Milling percentage
Weight of polished rice includes head and broken also. The Milling
Recovery (MR) is calculated by the following formula suggested by (Mandhyan
and Sharma, 1992)
MP (%) =Ma
Mb × 100 … … … . (3.12
Total rice = Broken rice + Head rice
Where,
MP = Milling percentage, (%);
Ma = Total weight of rice after milling, (g);
Mb = Total weight of rice before milling, (g).
Fig.3.5:Satake rubber rolls sheller for dehusking.
Fig.3.6: Satake whitener for polishing of rice
3.5 Preparation of Thick Size and Thin size Flaked Rice.
Flaked rice in two different sizes was prepared at Agro-
industries situated at a district Salhekasa (MH). The process of products
development is depicted in the flow diagram. Raw paddy was soaked in the water
for 24 hr at room temperature to increase its moisture content up to 30-32 %. This
was followed by complete removal of water from soaking tank and the soaked
paddy was conveyed through a bucket into the hopper of the paddy roaster
operated at the higher temperature for a short period of time in fine sand (172- 174
0C for 35-40 seconds). The process results in drying of husk with its internal
moisture content in the range of 17-19 % yielding roasted paddy that was
immediately conveyed to the rice flaking machine operating at 1440 rpm by 3 HP
electric motor. The machine resulted in the formation of flaked rice (35-40 seconds
for thick size flakes and for 65-85 seconds for thin size flakes), that was passed
further cleaned in a cleaning unit to separate any broken and husk from flaked rice.
3.6 Method of Preparing Flaked Rice
Paddy
Soaking (M.C. 30-32%, Temp. 28-30 0C)
Soaked paddy
Roasting (Sand Temp. 172 ±2 0C)
Roasted paddy (M.C. 17- 19 %, Temp. 100-102 0C)
Heated paddy in edge runner
1.Thick size 2. Thin size
Sieving and cleaning
Flaked rice
Fig.3.7 Process flow chart for the development of the different size flaked rice
Fig.3.8 Soaked paddy Fig.3.9 Roasting unit
Fig.3.10 Edge runner machine Fig.3.11 Flaked rice
3.7 Physical and Functional Properties of Flakes
3.7.1 Yield of flakes
After flaking process the flaked rice was thoroughly cleaned for husk and
bran the yield of flakes was expressed as percentage.
Yield of flakes =Total weight of flaked rice
Total weight of sample × 100 … … . (3.13)
3.7.2 Bulk density
Bulk density was determined by filling a measuring cylinder of 150 ml with
grains by pouring it from a certain height, striking off the top level and then
weighing the contents on a balance. The ratio of a weight of the sample and
volume occupied by it is expressed as the bulk density, g/ml.
Bulk Density (gm
ml) =
Weight of grains(gm)
Volume occupied by grains(ml) … … (3.14)
3.7.3 True density
True density was determined by adding 5 g of paddy grains in 25 ml
toluene in 100 ml measuring cylinder. The final volume was noted and true volume
of paddy sample was determined from the difference. The true density of the
sample was expressed as the ratio of a weight of the sample and the true volume, g
ml; (Joshi et al. 1993).
True Density (gm
ml) =
Weight of grains(gm)
True volume(ml) … . . (3.15)
3.7.4 Water absorption index and water solubility index
The WAI and WSI of rice flour samples were determined following the
method described by Kadan et al. One gram (1.00 g) of dried flour sample was
accurately weighed and suspended in 6 ml of distilled water and shaken in water-
bath at 80 0C for 30 min. The content was centrifuged at 2,500 rpm (Universal
32R, Hettich Zentrigugen, Germany) for 10 min. The supernatant was carefully
poured into an aluminum dish (of known weight) before drying at 105 0C for 10 h
and weighing. The sediment was collected and weighed. The WAI and WSI were
calculated from equations (3.16) and (3.17).
WAI =Weight of wet sediment
dry weight of flour … … … . (3.16)
WSI(%) =Weight of dried solids in supernatant
dry weight of flour× 100 … … … (3.17)
3.7.5 Water uptake (WU)
It was measured by taking 2 g sample in a graduated test tube and pour 10
ml of water into test tube,let it soak for 3 minutes. Then boil it for 45 minutes at 77
0C to 80 0C in a constant temperature using water bath and keep 2-3 test tubes with
10 ml water as control with the samples in the water bath. Immediately place the
tubes in a beaker containing cold water for cooling. Poured the supernatant water
into graduated cylinder after cooling and note the water levels. These can be
calculated as -
WU =100
2× actual water absorbed … … … . (3.18)
Fig.3.12: Waterbath for water uptake.
3.7.6 Swelling power (SP)
The SP of rice flour samples was determined by measuring water uptake of
the samples. The 500 mg of rice flour was weighed into centrifuge tube and 15 ml
of distilled water was added. The suspension was heated in water bath at 80˚C for
30 min and then centrifuged at 4,000 rpm for 20 min. The supernatant was
carefully poured into aluminum dish (of known weight) before drying at 105˚C to
constant weight and weighing. The sediment was collected and weighed. SP was
calculated using equation:
SP =Weight of wet sediment
Weight of flour − Weight of dried solids in supernatant . . . . . (3.19)
3.8 Standarization of Puffed Rice
3.8.1 Preparation of parboiled milled rice
About 1 kg of paddy variety of Mahamaya, Rajeshwari, and Dokra Mecha
were cleaned for parboiling. The cleaned paddy was boiled for 40-45 min. and
after boiling, the temperature of soak water drops to 60-70 0C within two hours.
Boiled paddy was soaked in the hot water for overnight after which the water is
drained off. The colour of the soak water turns brown. The soaked paddy is boiled
in the same container for steaming with remaining poured water in the container
for 35-40 min. until the husks just begin to crack open. Paddy was kept for the sun
drying about to 4-6 hr. After drying of paddy, tempered for 1-2 hr and dried paddy
was shelled using iron mortar and pestle. Prepared pre-gelatinized milled rice was
used for preparing puffed rice.
(a) (b)
Fig.3.13: (a) Sun drying (b) Parboiled rice
3.8.2 Puffed rice by using a continuous fluidized bed rice puffing machine
Prepared pre-gelatinized rice of Mahamaya, Rajeshwari, and Dokra Mecha
were used for puffing in a continuous fluidized bed rice puffing machine. First
preparing conditioned rice as well mixing of salt solution about to 2-3% until an
adhesive misty layer is formed on the grain surface. The treated rice was warmed
in a pan at about to 80-100 0C for 10-15 min. and kept in between folded cloth for
tempering. The tempered product is roasted in for a few min. and the warmed
paddy is taken to the puffing machine.
The conditioned rice was continuously fed into the glass puffing vessel
through the feed hopper continuously. The desired puffing temperature was set at
temperature controller. The air velocity was set using variable speed drive. The
conditioned rice falling in the glass puffing vessel was puffed by the hot air and
carried up by the air stream and got collected separately. The samples were
collected and graded and product was analyzed for quality parameters. The time
taken for puffing and the weight of output were noted for analyses.
3.8.3 Method for preparing puffed rice
Paddy
Soak overnight in just boiled water
Steaming
Drying
Parboiled paddy
Milling
Milled parboiled rice
Mixed with salt solution
Pre-heat in iron pan
Tempering
Feed into a continuous fluidized bed rice puffing machine
Puffed rice
Fig. 3.14 Process flow chart for preparation of puffed rice.
3.8.4 Conditioning and preheating of parboiled milled rice
Salt was added to the parboiled milled rice sample in the form of saturated
solution and the mixture was thoroughly mixed before giving heat treatment for
drying to the optimum moisture content required for puffing.
Table 3.1- Treatments for standardization of puffing temperature for
puffed rice.
Variety Moisture content (wb %) Puffing temperature
(0C) Adding 2% salt
solution
After 15 min. pre-
heat treatment
Mahamaya 19.73 13 270, 290, 310
Rajeshwari 18.19 12.76 270, 290, 310
DokraMecha 19.59 12.85 270, 290, 310
3.9 Physical Properties of Puffed Rice
3.9.1 Puffing yield
Un-puffed and puffed rice from the sample after puffing were separated by
hand picking and weighed. Puffing yield was determined considering the
proportion of puffed grains in the sample (Maisont and Narkrugsa, 2009). The
puffed yield of the rice was expressed as a weight percentage.
Puffing yield (%)
=Weight of puffed grains in sample (g)
Total weight of the sample (g)× 100 … (3.20)
3.9.2 Bulk density
Bulk density was determined by filling a measuring cylinder of 150 ml with
puffed rice by pouring it from a certain height, striking off the top level and then
weighing the contents on a balance. The ratio of a weight of the sample and
volume occupied by it is expressed as the bulk density, g/ml.
Bulk Density (gm
ml)
=Weight of puffed rice(gm)
Volume occupied by puffed rice(ml) (3.21)
Fig.3.15 Salted treated parboiled rice Fig.3.16 Pre-heating
Fig.3.17 Continuous fluidized puffing machine Fig.3.18 Puffed rice
3.9.3 Volume expansion ratio
The volume of the puffed rice was determined by the method of
Simsrisakul (1991), with some modifications. Puffed rice was placed in a beaker
with known volume. The remaining space in the beaker was filled with black
sesame of known volume. The volume of puffed rice was calculated by subtracting
the volume of black sesame from the beaker volume. Expansion volume was
calculated using Equation
Volume expansion ratio
=Volume of sample after puffing (ml)
Volume of sample before puffing (ml) … … . . (3.22)
3.9.4 Length expansion and width expansion
The length and width of the unpuffed and puffed rice were also measured
manually by a vernier caliper (Mitutoyo, Japan; precision = 0.05 mm). All the
dimensions were measured in millimeter unit. The measurement was made on ten
randomly drawn grains from the test samples of each variety. For calculation of
length and width expansion, the average of all ten measured grains was taken.
Length expansion and width expansion were expressed using the
following formulae:
Length expansio =Lf
Li . . … . (3.23)
Width expansion =Wf
Wi … . (3.24)
Where,
Li and Wi is the initial length and width of unpuffed rice samples
Lf and Wf is the final length and width of puffed rice samples
3.10 Chemical Properties
3.10.1 Moisture content
The moisture content of the sample was determined by standard air- oven
method (Ranganna, 1995). A test sample of 5 g was kept for 24 hours in hot air
electric oven maintained at 105°C. After 24 h the sample was drawn from the oven
and placed in desiccators for cooling to ambient temperature. After cooling the
weight of the sample was taken precisely. The loss in weight was determined and
moisture content was calculated using the following expression:
Moisture content, (%)
=Weight of moisture
Weight of dry matter× 100 … … (3.25)
3.10.2 Alkali spreading value (ASV)
It was measured in terms of alkali disintegration using 7-point numerical
spreading scale as suggested by Little et al. (1958). Six milled rice kernel were
evenly placed in petriplates containing 1.7 per cent KOH solution at 30 + 10C for
23 hours and the spreading scale was recorded in following manner (Table 3.2).
Table 3.2: Scale for alkali spreading value or gelatinization temperature
Score Spreading
1 Grain not affected
2 Grain swollen
3 Grain swollen, collar incomplete or narrow
4 Grain swollen, collar complete and wide
5 Grain split or segmented, collar complete and wide
6 Grain disappearing, merging with color
7 Grain with complete disappearing, intermingled
Classification Alkali spreading value (ASV) gelatinization temperature (GT)
1-2 Low High (>74˚C)
3 Low-intermediate High, intermediate
4-5 Intermediate Intermediate (70-74˚C)
6-7 High Low
Fig.3.19:Determination of GT
3.10.3 Determination of gel consistency.
Take 0.1 g sample of ground powder and put into a test tube. 0.025% of
(0.2 ml) thymol blue was added to each tube. The tubes were shaken well by
stirring in a Vortex shaker 0.2 ml of 0.2 N KOH was then added and the tubes
stirred again. Sealing the tubes with foil and put on water bath for 8 min., removed
and kept in ice-water bath for 20 min. After this treatment, the tubes were placed
horizontally on a table for 1 hr before measuring the gel length from the bottom of
the end of the gel in millimeters.
Table 3.3 Classification of gel
Classification Length of gel(mm)
Hard 27-35
Medium Hard 36-40
Medium 41-60
Soft 61-100
If Then
Gel consistency is hard, The cooked rice tends to be less sticky. Harder gel consistency is associated with harder cooked rices and this feature is particularly evident in high-amylose rice.
Gel consistency is soft, The cooked rice has a higher degree of tenderness. This is a preferred characteristic
(a) (b)
Fig. 3.20:Determination gel consistency
3.10.4 Fat content
Oven dry beaker and sample at 100˚C for half hrs. Keep them in dessicator
to avoid moisture content gain from the atmosphere. Weight the beaker and note
the reading as initial weight. Carefully weight 5 g of flake flour and keep in
cellulose thimble. The thimble was then placed in a soxhlet apparatus and extracted
with petroleum ether (80 ml) for 6 h at 80˚C. The ether was then removed by
evaporation and the flask with the residue dried in an oven at 60-70°C for 1hr,
cooled in a desiccator and weighed. The percentage of fat was calculated using the
formula
Fat content (%) = Weight of fat
Weight of sample × 100 … . . (3.26)
Fat content (%) = (B – A) x 100/ W
Where,
A= Initial weight of beaker, g;
B=Final weight of beaker, g;
W= Weight of sample taken, g.
(a) Socs plus machine (b) Fat inside beaker
Fig.3.21:Determination of fat content
3.10.5 Ash content
Ash content was determined according to AACC (1976) procedure. 1g of
sample was taken in a silica crucible and weighed. It was made to ash in a muffle
furnace at 600°C for 3 to 4 hours. The crucible was cooled in the desiccators and
weighed, and the value for ash content was calculated by using the following
expression:
Ash content (%)
=Weight of ash and crusible − weight of empty crusible
initial weight of sample
× 100 … . (3.27) (3.27)
Fig.3.22 Ash content
3.10.6 Protein content
Nitrogen (N2,%) of brown rice samples was estimated by using auto
Kjeldahl equipment (Kel Plus, Pelican System, India). Digestion of brown rice (0.5
g sample size) was carried out in the auto Kjeldahl equipment at 420 °C for 2 h.
The digested sample so obtained was distilled with 40 % NaOH and 4 % boric
acid. The vapor of ammonia obtained after distillation was collected in boric acid
(distillation time approximately 9 min) and then titrated against 0.05 N sulfamic
acid. The percentage of N2 of brown rice samples was calculated using the
following equation (Ranganna 1986).
N2 (%) =14.01 × (SR − BR) × 0.05 × 100
1000 × Weight of rice sample . … (3.28)
Where,
14.01 is atomic weight of nitrogen,
SR = titrate reading of the sample (ml),
BR = titrate reading of the blank sample (ml),
Ws = weight of the sample (g).
Then, protein content was estimated by using the following expression
(Juliano 1985):
Protein content = N2 × 5.95 ……..(3.29)
3.10.7 Determination of Starch content.
Starch content was determined by the anthrone method (Hodge and
Hofreiter, 1962). In this method starch is hydrolyzed in hot acidic medium to
glucose and dehydrated to hydroxymethylfurfural. This compound forms a green
coloured product with anthrone.0.5g sample was taken in test tube and 5 ml hot
80% ethanol added to remove sugars. Centrifuge at 6000 rpm and retain the
residue. The residue wash repeatedly with hot 80% ethanol till the washings do not
give colour with anthrone reagent. Dry the residue well over a water bath. To the
residue add 5.0 ml of water and 6.5 ml of 52% perchloric acid and extract at 0°C
for 20 min. and Centrifuge and save the supernatant. Repeat the extraction using
fresh perchloric acid. Centrifuge and pool the supernatants and make up to 100 ml.
Pipette out 0.1 or 0.2 ml of the supernatant and make up the volume to 1 ml with
water. Prepare the standards by taking 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 and 1 ml of the working
standard and make up the volume to 1 ml in each tube with water. Add 4 ml of
anthrone reagent to each tube. Heat for eight minutes in a boiling water bath. Cool
rapidly and read the intensity of green to dark green colour at 630 nm using
spectrometer. The amount of glucose in the sample was calculated using the
standard graph
Fig. 3.23: Standard graph of glucose solution using anthrone reagent.
3.10.8 Determination of amylose
Starch is composed of two components, namely amylose and amylopectin.
Amylose is a linear or non-branched polymer of glucose. The glucose units are
joined by α-1-4 glucosidic linkages. Amylose exists in coiled form and each coil
contains six glucose residues. The amylose content of starches usually ranges from
15 to 35%. High amylose content rice shows high volume expansion (not
necessarily elongation) and high degree of flakiness. The iodine is adsorbed within
the helical coils of amylose to produce a blue-coloured complex which is measured
colorimetrically.
0.0970.138
0.269
0.409 0.4220.469
0.5330.59
0.711
0.898y = 0.802x + 0.012
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Abso
rban
ce a
t 630 n
m
Concentration of glucose (µg/ml)
Procedure
A 100 mg of powdered sample of each grain variety was weighed and put
into a conical flask and 1 mL distilled ethanol and 10 ml of 1 N NaOH were added.
Then the sample was heated in boiling water bath for 10 minutes. 100 ml volume
was made up by adding distilled water. 2.5 ml of the extract was taken then 20 ml
distilled water and 3 drops of phenolphthalein were added. HCl solution was added
drop by drop until the pink colour just disappeared. After that 1 ml iodine reagent
(IKI solution) was added and 50 ml volume was made up by adding distilled water
then the colour of solution was read at 590 nm. The reference solution was
prepared by diluting 1 ml iodine reagent into 50 ml distilled water. A standard
graph of amylose content was developed by taking the colour of standard amylose
solution at different concentration 0.1,0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, and 1 ml
at 590 nm.
Fig. 3.24 Standard graph of amylose solution using anthrone reagent
y = 0.0094x + 0.0866R² = 0.9925
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
ab
sorb
an
ce a
t 5
90
nm
amylose concentration (%)
Series1
Fig.3.25 Water bath and UV Photo Spectrometer
3.10.9 Amylopectin
The amount of amylopectin is obtained by subtracting the amylose content
from that of starch.
3.11 Sensory Evaluation of Flaked and Puffed rice.
For the evaluation of organoleptic properties of prepared value added
products a 9-Point hedonic Scale method was selected. A rating scale and test
procedure have been derived from the theoretical basis. The scale has nine points;
these points were given word descriptions from, “dislike extremely” to “like
extremely”. The length of scale was determined experimentally. Replicate testing
of products of varying hedonic value showed that responses were repeated more
consistently when scale has 9, rather than 5, 7 or 11 points. The scale points were
numbered from 1 to 9 and arithmetic mean of points checked is used as desired
index (David R. Peryam 1955).
The panels of semi- trained judges consisting of 11 members were gave
value added products samples for evaluation of organoleptic properties viz.
appearance, colour, taste, flavor, texture and overall acceptability. It will serve to
panel at day of preparation. The following list was given to show us the details of
the scale to judges.
Scale
1. Extremely dislike
2. Very much dislike
3. Dislike Moderately dislike
4. Slightly dislike
5. Neither like nor dislike
6. Slightly like
7. Moderately like
8. Very much like
9. Extremely like
The following picture showed us the sensory evaluation of prepared value
added products which are served with various species as described above at the
same day of preparation of value added products. The semi-trained panel of judges
was selected among the professors and students for the sensory evolution from
Faculty of Agricultural Engineering, Raipur.
3.12 Statistical Analysis
All experiment were replicated and standard deviations have been reported.
CRD and CRD factorial analysis test was carried out to ascertain the variation
between varieties for the respective attributes monitored.
CHAPTER-IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
In this chapter the results and discussion are presented which were obtained
during the experimental work. This chapter deals with the study related to the
evaluation of some potential rice varieties of Chhattisgarh for puffing and flaking.
The paddy varieties was obtained from Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding
and the evaluation of the paddy variety was studied in the SVCAET and RS, FAE
and Department of Plant Physiology, Bio-Chemistry, Medicinal & Aromatic Plants
IGKV, Raipur (C.G.).
4.1 Popularly Methods used for Producing Puffed Rice and Flaked
Rice Processing in the Chhattisgarh State
Chhattisgarh is agricultural chief land and due to the large production of
rice Chhattisgarh is known as the “rice of bowl” of India. Chhattisgarh used to
produce over seventy percent of the total paddy production in the state. The survey
was conducted to know about popularly used methods for producing puffed rice
and flaked rice in the state, visited some famous producing places of puffed and
flaked rice: Bilaspur, Raipur, Dhamtari and Rajnandgaon district of Chhattisgarh.
As per the survey conducted, following methods are observed for puffed
and flaked rice processing.
1. Rice puffing by hot sand roasting – traditional method
2. Rice puffing by hot sand roasting – commercial method
3. Rice flaking by using dhenki unit –traditional method
4. Rice flaking by using edge runner machine –commercial method
4.1.1 Traditional method – Rice puffing by hot sand roasting method
Hot sand roasting is a common puffing technique in the villages for
traditional puffing of rice and very popular in the region. All the puffing activities
are carried out manually viz., conditioning, roasting, puffing etc. A large work is
filled with sand and heated to high temperature. In processing by traditional level
they are procuring pre-gelatinized milled rice from the rice mill industries as a raw
material. In the process, after pre-heat treatment of raw material, samples are
exposed to hot sand into heating furnace, while temperature of sand is about 250
0C and continuously stirred with a spatula until the samples puff from the heat, the
rice puffs in just a couple of seconds, then the sand and puffed rice are separated
through a wire mesh screen sieve.
The detailed flow chart of the method is given in Fig 4.1
Raw material
Pre- gelatinized milled rice (procured from rice mill)
Mixed with salt solution (as per taste)
Pre-heated by iron pot
Tempered
Sand roasted (about 250 0C)
Sieved (wire mesh screen)
Puffed rice
Fig 4.1 Rice puffed by hot sand roasting – traditional method
Fig 4.2 Rice samples exposed to hot sand
Fig 4.3 Puffed rice separated by sieve
4.1.2 Commercial method – rice puffing by hot sand roasting method
In commercially, hot sand roasting is a common and very popular puffing
technique for production of puffed rice in the region. The process of puffing from
pre-gelatinized rice sample to puffed rice are carried out by fully mechanically
setup installed by parts of an elevator, screw conveyor, wooden chaff aspirator, a
cylinder i.e. sand roasting unit, cleaning and separating unit etc. by using the
mechanical method. Normal preheating of raw material without adding salt
solution by the sand roasting then prepared salt solution is added continuously into
preheated sample conveyed for the sand roasting unit by a screw conveyor. The
sand roaster is heated by burning of wooden chaff powder sending to the roasting
unit by the aspirator. Puffing is done into cylinder of the sand roasting unit and
collected from cleaning and separating unit which are separated sand particles from
puffed rice and packing of puffed rice is completed. The detailed flow chart of the
method is given in Fig 4.4
Raw material
Pre-gelatinized milled rice (procured from rice mill industries)
Pre-heat treatment
Elevated sample
Conveyed by screw conveyor
Added salt solution continuously (solution of 1 kg salt into 20 liter water)
Sand roasted (about 250 0C)
Puffed rice
Cleaned
Packed
Fig 4.4 Rice puffed by hot sand roasting method- commercial method
Fig.4.5 Rice puffing unit by commercial method
4.1.3 Traditional method - rice flaking by using dhenki unit
The traditional technique for making flaked rice is very popular in the rural
areas of this region is using by the Dhenki unit situated at their house for small
scale purposes. In the process of making flaked rice by this method, first preparing
paddy samples which is obtained by soaking paddy in small bucket in water
overnight and next day drained water after which soaked paddy is heated by using
small unit of sand roasting traditionally and this prepared heated paddy is allowed
in the dhenki unit for pressing manually and obtained rice flakes with paddy husks
are separated by using wooden separator manually.
Fig 4.6 Dhenki unit for making flaked rice
4.1.4 Commercial method - rice flaking by using edge runner machine
In the commercial method, preparation of rice flakes from raw paddy
samples is carried out into small scale industries by consisting different steps i.e.
soaking, roasting, tempering and flattening of paddy etc. In this process, the
cleaned paddy after soaking in hot water for about 3-4 hr water was drained and
keep overnight to removing all the adhering moisture. This high moisture paddy
was taken into the roaster, which was heated by paddy husk externally. Time of
roasting of paddy tackled by appearing just a popping point reached of samples.
This hot paddy was passed through a sieve, where the sand was separated and hot
paddy obtained and this was tempered by keeping in a basket by covering with
paddy husk for about 5min. and flaked in an edge runner. These flakes were named
as edge runner flakes.
The detailed flow chart of the method is given in Fig 4.7
Raw material
Cleaned paddy
Soaked in hot water
Drained water
Kept overnight
Roasted
Heated paddy (tempered by covering with paddy husk)
Flaked into edge runner
Edge runner flakes
Fig 4.7 Rice flaking by edge runner machine- commercial method
Fig.4.8 Rice flaking unit
4.2 Physical Properties of Paddy
4.2.1 Moisture content (M.C.)
The initial moisture content of the paddy varieties Mahamaya, Rajeshwari
and Dokra Mecha at the time of experiment was 11.38%, 11.44% and 11.99 % wet
basis. The moisture content found can help to suggest the stability in storage of
paddy.
4.2.2 Length, width and thickness (LWT)
It is seen from (Table 4.1) that the longitudinal dimension or Length (L) of
paddy ranged from 8.41 to 10.45 mm with mean value as 9.516 ± 0.41 mm for
mahamaya, 8.05 to 11.15 mm with mean value 9.429 ± 0.45 mm for Rajeshwari.
Similarly the length of Dokra Mecha varied from 10.87 to 13.20 with mean value
12.116 ± 0.50 respectively. Among all varieties the length of Dokra Mecha was
found long and Mahamaya was found short as compared to long variety.
The width (W) of Mahamaya variety, ranged from 2.08 to 3.29 mm with
mean value as 2.945 ± 0.18 mm, 2.09 to 3.18 mm with mean value 2.888 ± 0.17
mm was found in Rajeshwari. Similarly the width of Dokra Mecha varied from
2.27 to 3.83 with mean value 3.299 ± 0.27 respectively. Among all varieties the
width of Dokra Mecha variety found more as compared to other.
Thickness (T) of Mahamaya variety ranged from 1.85 to 2.93 with mean
value 2.171 ± 0.13 mm and the Rajeshwari variety varied from 1.88 to 3.26 mm
with mean value 2.170 ± 0.14 mm. Similarly thickness of Dokra Mecha varied
from 1.49 to 3.21 mm with mean 2.069 ± 0.23 mm, respectively. Among all
varieties the thickness of Mahamaya was more as compared to other varieties.
4.2.3 Geometric mean diameter (GMD)
The GMD of Mahamaya, Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha Varieties was
found 3.92 ± 0.11, 3.89 ± 0.13 4.34 ± 0.23. Geometric mean diameter of paddy
indicates the central tendency.In Dokra Mecha varieties the GMD was more. By
increasing the moisture levels, the amount of GMD increased.
4.2.4 Mass of paddy seed (M)
Mean of thousands paddy seed was found 31.68, 23.76 and 28.32 in
Mahamaya, Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha with standard deviation 0.04, 0.02 and
0.01. It was found that the mass of mahamaya variety was more than other two
varieties. The mass of Rajeshwari variety. This mean that the weight of mahamaya
was more than rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha variety. Mass is an important
parameter to be in the design of cleaning grains using aerodynamic force ( Oje
and Ugbor).
4.2.5 Sphericity ( Sp)
Sphericity of the Mahamaya, Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha varieties varied
from 37.71 to 45.74 and 22.95 to 36.92, 34.50 to 47.19 with mean value 41.33 ±
1.57 and 41.34 ± 1.94 and 35.92 ± 1.97 respectively. In Dokra Mecha variety the
sphericity value was lower than Rajeshwari and Mahamaya. The lower sphericity
values suggested that the paddy tend towards a cylindrical shape (Omobuwajo et.
al 2000). The lower value of sphericity generally indicate a likely difficulty in
getting the paddy to roll than that of peas like spheroid grains. They can, however,
slide on their flat surfaces. This tendency to either roll or slide should be necessary
in the design of hoppers for milling process.
4.2.6 Aspect ratio (Ra )
Aspect ratio of Mahamaya, Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha varied from
20.77 to 38.63, 31.99 to 42.67 and 20.34 to 34.13 with mean 31.05 ± 2.30, 30.73 ±
2.64 and 27.27 ± 2.42 % respectively. In Dokra Mecha Variety the value of aspect
ratio was less. Thus, the lower values of the aspect ratio generally indicate a likely
difficulty in getting the paddy to roll than that of peas like spheroid grains. They
can, however, slide on their flat surfaces.
4.2.7 Surface area (Sa)
The surface area ranged from 38.83 to 53.56, 37.84 to 67.61, 40.96 to 80.30
with mean 48.51 ± 2.70, 47.61 ± 3.44, 59.54 ± 6.34 mm2 respectively. The surface
area is a relevant tool in determining the shape of the seeds. This will actually be
an indication of the way the paddy will behave on oscillating surfaces during
processing (Alonge et. al. 1999).
4.2.8 Bulk density and True density (BD and TD)
Bulk density value lies between 0.69 to 0.72, 0.69 to 0.74 and 0.46 to 0.48
gm/ml with mean 0.71±0.01, 0.71±0.01 and 0.47 ±0.007gm/ml in Mahamaya,
Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha respectively. The bulk density was lower in Dokra
Mecha and higher in Rajeshwari varieties. The true density value lies within 1.00
to 1.25, 1.00 to 1.67, 1.00 to 1.25 g/ml. However, the mean value was 1.10 ± 0.12,
1.17 ± 0.21, 1.12 ± 0.13 g/ml. The value of true density indicates that, the paddy
density is higher than water, which is the important property in case of food grains
during wet cleaning, as paddy does not float on water.
4.2.9 Angle of repose (φ)
The angle of repose was 26.98 to 33.2, 33.2 to 36.02, 30.19 to 33.20 with
mean 31.05 ± 2.59, 34.14±1.20, 31.70±1.50. Angle of repose was high in
Rajeshwari variety.This phenomenon is imperative in food grain processing,
particularly in the designing of hopper for milling equipment.
4.2.10 Coefficient of friction
The coefficient of friction shown in Table 4.2. The co-efficient of static
friction was found 0.24 ± 2.28 on plywood, 0.26 ± 0.02 on glass and 0.39 ± 0.01
on a mild steel, 0.43 ± 0.02 on a rubber. For Rajeshwari 0.23 ± 0.02 on plywood,
0.25 ± 0.02 on glass and 0.41 ± 0.03 on a mild steel, 0.48 ± 0.02 on a rubber
Similarly for Dokra Mecha 0.22 ± 0.01 on plywood, 0.23 ± 0.02 on glass and 0.38
± 0.01 on a mild steel, 0.44 ± 0.01 on a rubber It is observed that obtained values
of coefficient of static frictions for paddy are lower. This fact was expected
because the milling operation makes the grain surface smoother which agrees with
(Mohsenin 1986), who affirms that the friction and consequently its coefficient are
affected mainly by the nature and type of the surface in contact.
Table 4.1 Physical properties of different varieties of paddy
Parameters Number of
observation
Unit of
measurement
Mahamaya Rajeshwari Dokra Mecha
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Length 100 mm 9.51 0.41 9.42 0.45 12.11 0.50
Width 100 mm 2.94 0.18 2.88 0.17 3.29 0.27
Thickness 100 mm 2.17 0.13 2.17 0.14 2.06 0.230
GMD 100 mm 3.92 0.11 3.89 0.13 4.34 0.23
Surface
area
100 mm2 48.51 2.70 47.61 3.44 59.54 6.34
Sphericity 100 % 41.33 1.57 41.34 1.94 35.92 1.97
Aspect
ratio
100 % 31.05 2.30 30.73 2.64 27.27 2,42
Bulk
density
10 gm/ml 0.71 0.01 0.71 0.01 0.47 0.007
True
density
10 gm/ml 1.10 0.12 1.17 0.21 1.12 0.13
Thousand
wt. of
grains
5 gm 31.68 0.04 23.76 0.01 28.32 0.01
Angle of
repose
10 Degrees 31.05 2.59 34.14 1.20 31.70 1.50
Table 4.2 Coefficient of friction of different paddy varieties
Surface Number of
observation
Mahamaya Rajeshwari Dokra Mecha
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Plywood 10 0.24 0.02 0.23 0.02 0.22 0.01
Glass 10 0.26 0.02 0.25 0.02 0.23 0.02
Mild steel 10 0.39 0.01 0.41 0.03 0.38 0.01
Rubber 10 0.43 0.02 0.48 0.02 0.44 0.01
4.3 Hulling and milling percentage
At the time of milling the moisture content of paddy was 11.38 to 11.99 %
wb. The hulling and milling percentage of varieties are shown in Table 4.3 and Fig
4.9. It was obserbed that the hulling and milling percentage are more in
Mahamaya variety.
Table 4.3 Hulling and milling percentage
Varieties Wt. of
paddy
(g)
Moisture
content
(%)
Hulling
percentage
(%)
Milling
percentage
(%)
Mahamaya 100 11.38 78.43 66.91
Rajeshwari 100 11.45 78.05 69.02
Dokra
Mecha
100 11.99 70.98 58.47
Fig. 4.9 Effect of moisture content on hulling and milling
4.4 Chemical properties of rice
4.4.1 Alkali spreading value and gel consistency of rice.
ASV, especially, is used as an inverse indicator of the gelatinisation
temperature (GT) of milled rice starch granules (Delwiche et al., 1996).The
importance of gelatinization temperature is for determining, the time required for
cooking milled rice. The differences in GT could be due to the environmental
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Moisture (%)Hulling (%)
Milling (%)
Mahamaya
Rajeshwari
Dokra Mecha
conditions such as temperature during ripening. Gelatinization temperature directly
affects the physical properties of the starch granule, which in turn influences the
quality ratings of cooked rice. Rice with a high gelatinization temperature becomes
excessively soft and tends to disintegrate when overcooked. Under standard
cooking procedures, this type of rice tends to remain undercooked. It requires more
water and time to cook than those with low or intermediate gelatinization
temperature. Thus, gelatinization temperature correlates positively with the time
required to cook rice. High amylose is responsible for high gelatinization
temperature and low alkali spreading value (Mariotti, Fongaro, & Catenacci,
2010).
Gel consistency measures the tendency of the cooked rice to harden on
cooling. Varietal differences in gel consistency exist among varieties of similar
high amylose content (more than 25%). Alkali spreading value and gel consistency
of rice are shown in Table 4.4.
Table 4.4 Alkali spreading value and gel consistency of rice.
Varieties Alkali
Spreading
Value
Gelatinizati
on
Temperatur
e (GT)
Gelatinizati
on
Temperatur
e (˚C)
Gel
Consistency
(mm)
Category
Mahamay
a
6.33±0.57*
*
Low <70 ˚C 99.16±1.04** Soft
Rajeshwar
i
4.33±0.57*
*
Intermediat
e
70-74 ˚C 81.16±0.28** Soft
Dokra
Mecha
3.00±0** High
intermediat
e
>80˚C 97.66±0.57** Soft
Value represented as mean ± Standard deviation, ** mean are significant at level
1%, (n=3)
CV (%) F Cal S Em CD (5%)
Gel Consistency 0.76 598.5** 0.4082 1.41
Alkali Spreading Value 10.35 38.00** 0.272 0.94
** Significant at 1%
4.4.2 Amylose, starch and amylopectin
The chemical properties of raw rice i.e. Amylose, Starch and Amylopectin
content of three varieties Mahamaya, Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha are shown in
Table 4.5 and Fig. 4.10. Amylose content in all varieties found between 19.050 to
25.291 %, lower for Dokra Mecha and higher for Mahamaya,Starch content of all
varieties found between 70.569 to 75.783 % lower for Dokra Mecha and higer for
Mahamaya. Amylopectine found higher in Dokra Mecha and lower in Mahamaya.
Starch molecules are comprised of amylose and amylopectin. The amylose content
of rice plays an important role in deciding the puffing characteristics. Amylose is
composed of linear chain of glucose molecules which align themselves in the shear
fields and thus are difficult to pull apart during the extrusion process (Moraru &
Kokini, 2003). Since high-amylose content rice varieties are hard to shear, there is
a greater chance that pressure will build up during the thermal treatment. This
perhaps resulted in a sudden expansion of the endosperm, making it a highly
preferred product from puffing compared to their low amylose content
counterparts. It has been observed that highly packed starch molecules have a
better ability to expand compared to the loosely packed chalky grains. Amylose
and Starch content found significant at 1% level among all varieties. In Mahamaya
variety amylase and starch content found more as compared to other two variety.
Amylopectin was more in Dokra Mecha variety and found significant at 1% among
all varieties. From the table we observe that all varieties shows significant result.
Table 4.5 Chemical properties of rice
Varieties Amylose Starch Amylopectin
Mahamaya 25.291±1.117** 75.783±0.475** 74.160±0.827*
Rajeshwari 24.437±0.586** 74.605±0.077** 75.563±0.586*
Dokra Mecha 19.050±1.355** 70.569±0.554** 81.394±1.579*
Value represented as mean± Standard deviation,**means are significant at
1%,*means are significant at 5% and ns-not significant
Fig. 4.10 Chemical present in different varieties
4.5 Physical and Functional Properties of Flaked Rice
4.5.1 Moisture content while processing
Initially paddy had around 11.38 to 11.39 % moisture. Overnight soaked
paddy had around 33.13-34.16 % moisture, least was in Dokra mecha variety
Table 4.6 and fig. 4.18. At industrial level, paddy was aerated for 10-15 min,
where the moisture reduced by 5-8% and the moisture content ranged from 28 to
30%. This paddy is individually dropped in the roaster, where the paddy moved
for 23-25 seconds and when the paddy came out, the moisture content decreased
and it varied from 16 to 17%. This paddy was tempered in that hot condition for
about five minutes by covering with husk in small baskets followed by flaking in
an edge runner flaker. These flakes were further shade dried at room temperature,
where in the moisture content dropped down to 6-8%. Overall a decreasing trend in
moisture content was observed during the course of flaking process, almost 25%
decrease in the moisture was recorded during the process of flaking compared to
the initial moisture content of soaked paddy (Deepa and Vasudeva 2011). Table
4.6 and Fig.4.11.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Amylose Starch Amylopectin
Mahamaya
Rajeshwari
Dokra Mecha
Table 4.6 Moisture content of different paddy varieties while processing into
flakes.
Varieties
Paddy
Soaked paddy
Paddy after roasting
Flaked rice
Mahamaya
11.38±0.035
34.16±0.49
17.44±0.37
6.61± 0.21
Rajeshwari 11.45±0.030 33.88±0.80 17.27±0.39 7.92± 0.30
Dokra mecha 11.99±0.036 33.13±0.49 17.09±0.20 7.91± 0.04
Value reperseneted as mean±Standard deviation, (n =3)
Fig. 4.11 Effect of moisture content during processing of flaked rice
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Paddy Soaked
paddy
Paddy after
roasting
Flaked rice
Mahamaya
Rajeshwari
Dokra Mecha
Thick size Thin size
Mahamaya
Thick size Thin size
Rajeshwari
Thick size Thin size
Dokra Mecha
Fig.4.12 Flaked rice of different paddy varieties
4.5.2 Change in physical properties during development of flaked rice from
paddy
4.5.2.1 Yield of flaked rice
When 20 kg paddy of each variety was put in the edge runner machine,
after processing of flaked rice found that the yield of flaked rice and observed that
the yield was more in Rajeshwari variety followed by Mahamaya and Dokra
Mecha.
Table 4.7 Yield of flaked rice after processing.
4.5.2.2 Length, width and thickness of flaked rice
The change in dimensional properties at different levels of processing is
eminent as shown in Table 4.8. The longitudinal dimension or Length (L) for thick
size flaked rice ranged from 7.70 to 9.95 mm. For the width (W), ranged from 2.71
to 3.67 mm, thickness (T) ranged from 0.94 to 1.56 mm. Similarly for Rajeshwari ,
length, width, thickness ranged from 7.26 to 10.28, 2.84 to 4.05, 1.08 to 1.60 mm
and for Dokra mecha 8.78 to 11.49, 2.68 to 3.79, 0.82 to 1.67 mm. For thin size
flaked rice length, width ,thickness varied from 9.90 to16.48, 3.66 to 5.75, 0.55
to1.14 mm for Mahamaya variety. For Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha 11.61 to
18.36, 4.32 to 6.80, 0.37 to 0.85 mm and 12.23 to 16.02, 3.59 to 5.10, 0.53 to 1.18
mm respectively. Among all varieties length and width of Rajeshwari thin size
flaked rice was more and its thickness was less.
4.5.2.3 Bulk and true density of flaked rice
Bulk density of flaked rice was more as compared to paddy because after
processing of flaked rice the density increased ( Mohapatra and Bal 2012). Rice
grain flattened during double flaking process increased its length at the expense of
thickness and yielded a product with higher major dimensions and lower minor
dimension. Among all varieties it was found that true density was higher in
Varieties Yield (%)
Mahamaya 64.6
Rajeshwari 68.5
Dokra Mecha 62.9
Rajeshwari variety 1.66 g/ml for both size and bulk density was also higher in
Mahamaya variety.
Table 4.8 Change in physical properties during development of flaked rice from
paddy.
Parameters Mahamaya
Thick Thin
Size Size
Rajeshwari
Thick Thin
Size Size
Dokra mecha
Thick Thin
Size Size
Length (mm) 8.67±0.61 12.26±1.31 8.67±0.91 15.31 ±1.61 10.11±0.56 13.96±0.97
Width (mm) 3.19±0.24 4.32±0.47 3.31±0.28 5.57±0.56 3.11±0.26 4.28 ±0.33
Thickness (mm) 1.32± 0.15 0.77 ±0.11 1.37±0.13 0.55±0.10 1.27±0.17 0.84±0.12
TD (gm/ml) 1.65± 0.009 1.65±0.005 1.66±0.007 1.66±0.007 1.65±0.008 1.65±0.008
BD (gm/ml) 0.70±0.02 0.45 ±0.02 0.71±0.02 0.38 ±0.02 0.66±0.01 0.44±0.02
Values represented as Mean± Standard deviation, (n = 10)
TD-True density
BD-Bulk density
4.5.3 Functional properties of flaked rice
The water absorption index (WAI), water solubility index (WSI)
and swelling power (SP) of thick and thin size flaked rice are shown in Table 4.9.
The WAI and SP of thin size flaked rice of all varieties are found significant at 5%
level among all varieties. The WAI and WSI value found higher in Rajeshwari
variety as compared to other varieties. The varieties which has high amylose
content having more WAI and WSI. ( Thumrongchote et. al. 2012). The SP found
higher in Mahamaya variety. The water uptake (WU) of all varieties of flaked rice
are found non-significant among all varieties. Roasting at high temperature
resulted in decreasing moisture content of grains that led to the dry heat
gelatinization. Flaking resulted in the damage of some starch granules leading to
their enhanced water absorption capacity (Kumar et. al.2016).
Table 4.9 Functional properties of different varieties of flaked rice
Parameter Mahamaya Rajeshwari Dokra Mecha
Thick size Thin size Thick size Thin size Thick size Thin size
WAI 4.90±0.09ns 6.86±0.07* 4.62±0.05ns 7.17±0.07* 4.51±0.03n 6.39±0.03*
WSI 1.05±0.01ns 0.67±0.06ns 1.27±0.01ns 0.73±0.15ns 0.31±0.01ns 0.74±0.04ns
SP 4.95±0.09ns 6.90±0.08* 4.68±0.05ns 7.22±0.07* 4.56±0.03ns 6.44±0.03*
WU 402.66±14.49ns 644.5±10ns 384.5 ±9.57ns 642.83±23.24ns 372±1.60ns 552±14ns
Value represented as mean ± Standard deviation, (n=3).
WAI WSI SP WU
Thick
size
Thin
size
Thick
size
Thin
size
Thick
size
Thin
size
Thick
size
Thin
size
CV
(%)
3.53 1.10 10.22 18.35 3.41 1.21 3.71 3.10
F
Cal
1.044ns 12.951* 2.288ns 0.392ns 1.007ns 10.798* 1.075ns 0.116ns
S
Em
0.1188 0.0546 0.0828 0.0918 0.1164 0.0605 10.3290 14.097
CD
(5%)
- 0.25 - - - 0.27 - -
*means are significant at 5% and ns- non significant, WAI-Water absorption index
WSI-Water solubility index SP-Swelling power WU-Water uptake
4.6 Proximate Composition of Rice and Flaked Rice
Proximate composition of rice and flaked rice are shown in Table 4.10.
Moisture content and protein content of different varieties are found significantly
at 1% level all varieties. Fat content of rice and thin size flaked rice found
significant while thick size flaked rice found non significant among all varieties.
Ash content of rice are found non significant while thick and thin size flaked rice
are found significant at 5% and 1% level. It was found that in mahamaya rice
moisture and fat content was more, protein and ash content was more in Dokra
Mecha variety. While processing into flaked rice from paddy it was found that
moisture content, fat content, protein content was decreases but the ash content
was increases (Kumar et. al. 2016)
4.7 Moisture Content of Raw, Soaked, Steamed and Parboiled
Paddy Samples
The moisture content of Mahamaya, Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha paddy
was found 11.38, 11.45 and 11.99 % (wb) that increased to 41.32, 42.43 and 43.65
% (wb) respectively when it was soaked and 34.13, 32.09 and 34.50 % (wb)
respectively after steaming that indicate that there was sufficient hydration of the
rice endosperms. After steaming paddy was dried and we got parboiled paddy after
hulling. It was observed that temperature played the crucial role in moisture
content. It was shown in Table 4.11 and graph 4.13.
Table 4.11 Moisture content of the paddy varieties while processing into
parboiled samples
Varieties
Paddy
(% wb)
Soaked paddy
(% wb)
Steamed
paddy
(% wb)
Parboiled
paddy
(% wb)
Mahamaya
11.38±0.03
41.32±0.06
34.13±0.49
14.65 ±0.33
Rajeshwari 11.45±0.03 42.43±0.19 32.09±1.69 14.38±0.27
Dokra Mecha 11.99±0.03 43.65±0.04 34.50±1.25 14.61±0.56
Mean ± standard deviation
Fig. 4.13 Effect of moisture content while processing of parboiled rice.
0
10
20
30
40
50
PaddySoaked
paddySteamed
paddyParboiled
paddy
Mahamaya
Rajeshwari
Dokra Mecha
Table 4.10 Individual CRD analysis for proximate composition of rice and flaked rice.
Value represented as mean± Standard deviation, (n=3), **means are significant at 1%,*means are significant at 5% and ns-means are
not significant
Moisture content (%) Fat (%) Protein (%) Ash (%)
Rice Thick Thin Rice Thick Thin Rice Thick Thin Rice Thick Thin
CV (%) 0.49 2.20 0.44 0.59 11.43 8.26 2.10 0.48 1.46 9.12 15.16 3.64
F Cal 18.837* 46.584** 978.775* 7.489ns 4.498ns 9.212ns 151.873** 4648.557** 446.612** 1.324ns 12.195* 327.633**
S Em 0.0421 0.1161 0.0234 0.0061 0.0796 0.0543 0.1114 0.0237 0.0709 0.0321 0.2433 0.0280
CD (5%) 0.19 0.52 0.11 - - - 0.50 0.11 0.32 - 1.09 0.13
Parameter M.C. (%) Fat (%) Protein (%) Ash (%)
Rice 12.28±0.05** 1.44± 0.004** 6.70±0.11** 0.46±0.03ns
Mahamaya Thick size flake 6.66±0.27** 1.08 ±0.13ns 5.65± 0.02** 2.55±0.19**
Thin size flake 6.63±0.02** 1.03±0.09* 5.59±0.002** 0.58±0**
Rice 11.92±0.07** 0.99±0.01** 6.73±0.05** 0.48±0.07ns
Rajeshwari Thick size flake 7.94±0.02** 0.98±0.14ns 6.61±0.03** 2.93±0.56*
Thin size flake 7.85±0.04** 0.96±0.09* 6.53±0.16** 1.60±0.06**
Rice 12.12±0.05** 0.98±0.01** 9.10±0.23** 0.53±0.005ns
Dokra Mecha Thick size flake 7.91±0.06** 0.79±0ns 8.80±0.03** 1.31±0.03*
Thin size flake 7.91±0.007** 0.77±0.02* 8.52±0.05** 1.07±1.23**
4.8 Physical Characteristics of Puffed Rice
4.8.1 Expansion characteristics of varieties (LER, WER and VER of varieties)
The expansion properties of rice i.e. length expansion ratio (LER), breadth
wise expansion ratio (WER) and volume expansion ratio of puffed rice (VER) of
three varieties with different puffing temperature (270, 290 and 310 0C) are
presented in Table 4.12. The degree of puffing expansion is affected by the
conditions of thermal treatments, i.e. mainly its amylose content and parboiling
conditions (Chinnaswamy and Bhattacharya, 1983a, 1983b). The LER, WER and
VER of the puffed rice were found significantl between Varieties. The length
expansion ratio among all varieties are different at different temperature. At 310 0
LER was high as compared to other temperature and it was more in Mahamaya
variety (1.798) followed by Rajeshwari (1.645) and Dokra Mecha.(1.535) and
VER was high in Mahamaya variety (7.629) followed by Dokra Mecha (7.480) and
Rajeshwari variety (5.868).
Table 4.12 Effect of varietal differences on expansion characteristics of rice.
Rice
varieties
Puffing
Temperature
(0C)
Expansion characteristics
LER WER VER
Mahamaya 270 1.479±0.161 2.157±0.134 5.123±0.045
290 1.686±0.084 2.210±0.167 5.548±0.079
310 1.799±0.085 2.146±0.087 7.629±0.084
Rajeshwari 270 1.396±0.057 2.110±0.099 3.867±0.037
290 1.783±0.079 2.015±0.091 4.248±0.057
310 1.645±0.108 2.006±0.179 5.868±0.059
Dokra
Mecha
270 1.270±0.428 2.360±0.216 4.151±0.081
290 1.578±0.086 2.065±0.173 4.758±0.022
310 1.535±0.097 2.318±0.283 7.480±0.074
Value represented as mean±Standard deviation,LER-Length Expansion Ratio,
WER-Width Expansion Ratio, VER-Volume Expansion Ratio.
Table 4.13 Square root transformation applied for (LER), (WER) and (VER)
Length Expansion Ratio (LER)
Sources DF F Cal S Em CD (5%)
Treatment 8 9.40874 ** 0.03 0.16
V 2 9.32182 ** 0.02 0.09
T 2 25.73840 ** 0.02 0.09
VT 4 1.28737ns 0.03 -
Error 81
Width wise Expansion Ratio (WER)
Sources DF F Cal S Em CD (5%)
Treatment 8 3.89792 ** 0.06 0.18
V 2 8.03648 ** 0.04 0.10
T 2 72.39664 ns 0.04 -
VT 4 2.57929 * 0.06 0.18
Error 81
Volume Expansion Ratio (VER)
Sources DF F Cal S Em CD (5%)
Treatment 8 1417.72662** 0.04 0.11
V 2 1159.32862** 0.02 0.06
T 2 4320.78727** 0.02 0.06
VT 4 9539528 ** 0.04 0.11
Error 18
V = Paddy
Varieties
T = Puffing temp.
** Significant
NS- Non
Significant
4.8.2. Puffing yield
Yield of flaked rice at different temperature are shown in Table 4.14. Yield
shows the puffing quality of products. At 310 0C the puffing yield of Mahamaya,
Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha varieties varied from 79 to 79.91, 75 to 75.56 and
77 to 77.89. At 290 0C puffing yield varies from 75.82 to 76.06, 70.97 to 72.2 and
71.95 to 72.2 respectively. At 270 0C it varies from 70.85 to 70.96, 55.05 to 55.46
and 56.02 t0 56.23 respectively. From the table we found that at 310 0C puffing
yield are better as compared to other temperature. Puffing yield was higher in
Mahamaya variety and lower in Rajeshwari variety with mean and standard
deviation 79.56±0.30 and 75.25±0.16.
Fig. 4.14 Effect of temperature on puffing yield
4.8.3 Bulk density
Bulk density of puffed rice at different temperature are shown in Table
4.14. Bulk density of Mahamaya, Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha at 270 0C ranges
from 0.13 to 0.14, 0.170 to 0.171 and 0.142 to 0.145 g/ml respectively. At this
temperature bulk density was lower in Mahamaya and higher in Rajeshwari. At
290 0C bulk density ranges from 0.111 to 0.1119, 0.1413 to 0.1419 and 0.115 to
0.123 g/ml respectively. At 310 0C bulk density ranges from 0.079 to 0.082, 0.107
to 0.113 and 0.087 to 0.092 g/ml respectively. At 310 0C bulk density was found
lower as compared to bulk density at 270 0C. Among all temperature bulk density
was higher in Rajeshwari variety at 270 0C and lower in Mahamaya variety at 310
0C.
Table 4.14 Yield and bulk density of puffed rice at different temperature
Temperature Mahamaya Rajeshwari Dokra Mecha
Yield (%)
270 0C 70.9±0.03 55.26±0.14 56.12±0.06
290 0C 75.95±0.07 71.24±0.29 72.09±0.09
310 0C 79.56±0.30 75.25±0.16 77.59±0.316
Bulk
Density(g/ml)
270 0C 0.139±0.002 0.170±0.0002
0.141±0.0002
0.145±0.001
290 0C 0.111±0.0002 0.117±0.002
310 0C 0.081±0.001 0.110±0.001 0.088±0.002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
270 ˚C 290 ˚C 310 ˚C
Mahamaya
Rajeshwari
Dokra Mecha
Value represented as mean ± Standard deviation (n=3)
270˚C 290˚C 310˚C
Mahamaya puffed rice
270˚C 290˚C 310˚C
Rajeshwari puffed rice
270˚C 290˚C 310˚C
Dokra Mecha puffed rice
Fig.4.15 Puffed rice at different temperature
4.9 Nutritional composition of puffed rice from different rice
varieties.
The results of nutritional composition of puffed rice from different rice
varieties with different temperature (270 0C, 290 0C and 310 0C) of the paddy
varieties namely Mahamya, Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha are shown in Table 4.15
Moisture content was higher in raw rice as compared to puffed rice.
Moisture content is an important quality attribute of puffed rice which affects it’s
texture as it is highly hygroscopic in nature. Puffed rice is more preferred for its
crispiness in snacks and to retain it, it needs to be packed and stored in airtight
containers or in polypropylene bags which have the capacity to maintain product
moisture content below 3.5% ( Kamaraddii and Prakash 2015).
The moisture content of raw rice ranges from 11.92 to 12.28 %, lower for
Rajeshwari and higher for Mahamaya raw rice respectively. The moisture content
of puffed rice prepared at puffing temperature 270 0C, 290 0C and 310 0C ranges
from 6.49 to 7.77 %, lower for Mahamaya and higher for Dokra Mecha, 6.60 to
7.56 % for lower Dokra Mecha and higher Rajeshwari and 5.77 to 7.65 % ,for
lower mahamaya and higher Dokra Mecha respectively. All values shows
significant result at 1% level among all varieties, except Rajeshwari puffed rice
(310 0C).
Fat content of rice found significant at 1% level among all varieties and
puffed rice prepared at puffing temperature of 270 0C, 290 0C and 310 0C found to
be non significant results among all paddy varieties of Mamahaya, Rajeshwari and
Dokra Mecha respectively. Slightly changes of fat content from rice to puffed rice
at different processing condition shown in Table 4.13. The fat content in rice
ranges from 0.98 to 1.44, lower for Dokra Mecha and higher for Mahamaya
respectively. The fat content of puffed rice prepared at puffing temperature of 270
0C, 290 0C and 310 0C ranges from 0.97 to 1.00, 0.97 and 0.98 to 1.13, lower for
Mahamaya and Rajeshwari variety of puffed rice and found higher for the Dokra
Mecha variety of puffed rice respectively. Protein content of rice and puffed rice
prepared at puffing temperature of 270 0C, 290 0C and 310 0C found to be
significant results among all paddy varieties of the Mahamaya, Rajeshwari and
Dokra Mecha respectively. Slightly changes of protein content from rice to puffed
rice at different processing condition shown in Table 4.13 The protein content in
rice ranges from 6.70 to 9.10, lower for Mahamaya and higher for Dokra Mecha
respectively. The protein content of puffed rice prepared at puffing temperature of
270 0C, 290 0C and 310 0C ranges from 5.91 to 8.25, 6.28 to 8.62 and 6.23 to 8.50,
lower for Mahamaya variety of puffed rice and found higher for the Rajeshwari
variety of puffed rice respectively.
Total ash content of rice found non-significant results and puffed rice
prepared at puffing temperature of 270 0C and 290 0C found significant difference
and also at 310 0C found non-significant difference among all paddy varieties of
the Mahamya, Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha respectively. Total ash content in rice
ranges from 0.446 to 0.590, lower for the IGKV R2 and higher for the Barhasal
respectively. Total ash content of puffed rice prepared at puffing temperature of
270 0C, 290 0C and 310 0C ranges from 3.28 to 4.13, 2.86 to 3.90 and 3.15 to 3.84,
higher Rajeshwari respectively. The ash content of expanded rice samples was
much higher than what is generally seen for milled rice, the reason being
processing in sand medium in iron pans, which could contribute towards
contaminant minerals. The ash content of milled and parboiled rice as reported by
Oghbaei and Prakash (2010) was 0.32 and 0.55%, respectively. Khatoon and
Prakash (2006) reported a range of 0.4–0.6% of ash content in four varieties of
milled rice samples.
Table 4.15 Individual CRD analysis for nutritional composition of puffed rice from
different rice varieties.
Parameter M.C. (%) Fat (%) Protein (%) Ash (%)
Mahamaya R 12.28±0.05** 1.44± 0.004** 6.70±0.11** 0.46±0.03
T1 6.49±0.05** 0.97±0.003 6.03±0.11** 3.41±0.07*
T2 6.80±0.02** 0.97±0.007 6.45±0.05** 3.90±0.11**
T3 5.77±0.13** 0.98±0.007 6.23±0.05** 3.15±0.16
Rajeshwari R 11.92±0.07** 0.99±0.01** 6.73±0.05** 0.48±0.07
T1 7.21±0.09** 0.98±0.004 5.91±0.05** 3.28±0.27*
T2 7.56±0.06** 0.97±0.007 6.28±0.11** 3.44±0.02**
T3 6.42±0.14 0.98±0.007 6.23±0.05** 3.84±0.86
Dokra Mecha R 12.12±0.05** 0.98±0.01** 9.10±0.23** 0.53±0.005
T1 7.77±0.03** 1.00±0.04 8.25±0.11** 4.13±0.04*
T2 6.60±0.64** 0.97±0 8.62±0.10** 2.86±0.16**
T3 7.65±0.13** 1.13±0.08 8.50±0.05** 3.36±0.04
Value represented as mean± Standard deviation
Moisture content (%) Fat (%)
R T1 T2 T3 R T1 T2 T3
CV (%) 0.49 0.92 0.78 2.07 0.59 2.41 0.59 4.77
F Cal 18.837* 193.059** 173.613** 97.610** 7.489ns 0.661ns 0.500ns 5.760ns
S Em 0.0421 0.0464 0.0385 0.0967 0.0061 0.0168 0.0041 0.034
CD (5%) 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.44 - - - -
Protein (%) Ash (%)
R T1 T2 T3 R T1 T2 T3
CV (%) 2.10 1.50 1.36 0.84 9.12 4.55 3.42 14.65
F Cal 151.873** 339.345** 360.690** 1010.510** 1.324ns 15.538* 40.000** 0.983ns
S Em 0.1114 0.0715 0.0687 0.0414 0.0321 0.1163 0.0824 0.3580
CD (5%) 0.50 0.32 0.31 0.19 - 0.52 0.37 -
**means are significant at 1%,*means are significant at 5% and ns-means are not
significant. R-Rice sample T1-270˚C, T2-290˚C, T3-390˚C
4.10 Sensory Evaluation
The nine point hedonic scale was used for product quality evaluation on the
basis of appearance, colour, texture, flavor, taste, mouthfeel and overall
acceptability. The samples were analyzes through a group of 25 untrained peoples
from Faculty of Agriculture Engineering. Fig. 4.16 and 4.17 shows the average
points given to all products.
The mean sensory scores of flaked rice varieties are shown in Table 4.16.
Chivda was made for the sensory. As obserbed by length, width and thickness of
flakes Rajeshwari was more. Mostly people liked the Rajeshwari Chivda and the
highest scores for all attributes were given to Rajeshwari (7.55 to 8.36), followed
by Mahamaya (7.09 to 7.91) and Dokra Mecha (7.00 to 7.45).
The mean sensory scores of puffed rice varieties are shown in Table 4.17.
Salted puffed rice were made for sensory .The highest scores for all attributes were
given to Mahamaya (7.25 to 7.92), followed by Rajeshwari (7.08 to 7.83) and
Dokra Mecha (6.17 to 7.75). As observed by expansion characteristics of grain
length wise expansion and volume wise expansion ratio and sensory quality also
indicated that Mahamaya and Rajeshwari varieties most suitable for puffed rice
followed by Dokra Mecha.
Table 4.16 Sensory quality of flaked rice
Nutrients Rice varieties
Mahmaya Rajeshwari Dokra Mecha
Appearance 7.36±0.809 7.73±0.905 7.00±0.894
Colour 7.91±0.701 7.73±0.647 7.09±0.944
Texture 7.09±1.04 7.55±0.522 7.27±0.905
Taste 7.91±0.831 8.36±0.674 7.45±0.820
Mouthfeel 7.91±0.944 7.73±0.786 7.45±0.820
Flavor 7.45±0.934 7.73±0.905 7.36±0.674
Overall
acceptability
7.73±0.647 7.91±0.701 7.45±0.522
Value represented as mean±Standard deviation.
Fig 4.23 Graph of average number given by the judges for flaked rice using nine
point hedonic scale
Fig. 4.16 Products made for sensory evaluation
6
6.5
7
7.5
8
8.5
Mahamay
Rajeshwari
Dokra Mecha
Table 4.17 Sensory quality of Puffed rice
Nutrients Rice varieties
Mahamaya Rajeshwari Dokra Mecha
Appearance 7.25±1.138 7.58±0.793 6.17±0.835
Colour 7.67±0.651 7.83±0.718 6.75±0.622
Texture 7.75±0.622 7.08±0.793 6.83±0.718
Flavor 7.50±0.798 7.25±1.215 7.75±0.965
Taste 7.92±0.900 7.33±0.985 7.58±0.996
Overall
acceptability
7.50±0.52 7.42±0.900 6.92±0.793
Value represented as mean±Standard deviation.
Fig. 4.25 Graph of average number given by the judges for puffed rice using nine
point hedonic scale
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Mahamay
Rajeshwari
Dokra Mecha
CHAPTER-V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Paddy is second largest major cereal crop a member of grass family
(Graminaceae), which produces starchy seeds. Numerous varieties of paddy are
grown in the different parts of the state comprising of bold, long, cylinder, fine,
and cented etc. Many varieties are best suited for raw milling whereas many are
suitable for parboiling to produce rice for table purpose with direct cooking. On the
other hand, many of the varieties are better suited for the production of rice value
added products such as flaked rice (Poha or Chiwada), puffed rice (Muri or Murra
or Murmura).
Rice flakes is locally known by many names like aval, avalakki, poha,
chivda and beaten rice, which are prepared from paddy and has been claimed as a
good source of protein, fat and carbohydrate. It is a fast moving consumer item and
generally eaten as breakfast item. Rice flakes are made from paddy and hence they
are easy to digest. Spicy as well as sweet preparations are made from them in the
category of fast food items. Since the manufacturing process involves roasting of
rice, the shelf life of flakes is longer. Rice flakes or poha is an important breakfast
in semi-urban and rural areas and middle class families of urban India. Puffed rice
is a whole-grain puffed product obtained from pre-gelatinized milled parboiled
rice, generally prepared from preconditioning of grains by hydrothermal treatment,
followed by drying and milling. Puffed rice is used in snack foods and breakfast
cereals, and is also a popular street food in some parts of the world. It is an
ingredient of bhel puri, a popular Indian chaat item Hence, the study will be carried
out with the following objectives:
1. To study about processing methods popularly used for producing puffed
and flaked rice.
2. To study the puffing and flaking characteristics of selected varieties of
paddy.
3. To standardize the processing parameters for the puffing and flaking of
rice.
The present study entitled “Evaluation of Some Potential Rice Varieties of
Chhattisgarh for Puffing and Flaking” was carried out in the Department of
Agricultural Processing and Food Engineering, Faculty of Agricultural
Engineering and Department of Plant Physiology, Bio-Chemistry, Medicinal &
Aromatic Plants and Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, College of
Agriculture and, IGKV, Raipur (C.G.). The quality analysis were done in the R.H.
Richharia Research Laboratory of the IGKV. Based on the experimental results the
summary may be
1. Initial moisture content and while processing the paddy into flaked rice
and puffed rice was determine. The initial moisture content of paddy was
11.39 to 12 %. When processing into flaked rice there was increase in
moisture content after soaking (33.13 to 34.16 %) and before roasting it
was decrease and vary from 28.77 to 29.01 % and it was found to be
17.09 to 17.44 % and after processing it found to be 6.61 to 7.92 %.
2. The average length of paddy varieties Mahamaya, Rajeshwari and Dokra
Mecha varieties was found 9.51, 9.42 and 12.11 mm. Width was found
2.94, 2.88 and 3.29 mm and thickness was found 2.17, 1.17 and 2.06
mm.
3. Physical properties of flaked rice were determine and it was found that
average length of flaked rice for Mahamaya, Rajeshwari and Dokra
Mecha varieties was 8.67, 8.67 and 10.11 mm for thick size and 12.26,
15.31, and 13.96 mm for thin size. Width was 3.19, 3.31 and 3.11 mm
for thick size and 4.32, 5.57 and 4.28 mm for thin size and thickness
was 32, 1.37 and 1.27 mm for thick size and 0.77, 0.55 and 0.84 mm
respectively.
4. The average bulk density of paddy was 0.71,0.71 and 0.42 g/ml and true
density was 1.10, 1.17 and 1.12 g/ml respectively.
5. The average bulk density of flaked rice was 0.70, 0.71 and 0.66 g/ml for
thick size and 0.45 0.38 and 0.44 g/ml for thin size and True density was
1.65, 1.66 and 1.65 gm/ml for thick size and 1.65, 1.66 and 1.65 gm/ml
for thin size respectively.
6. Bulk density and yield of puffed rice was determine at temperature
270˚C, 290˚C and 310˚C and found that when yield of flaked rice more,
bulk density of puffed rice becomes low.
7. Hulling and milling percentage of Mahamaya, Rajeshwari and Dokra
Mecha varieties were found 78.43, 78.05, 70.98 % and 66.91,
69.02, 58.47 % respectively.
8. Alkali spreading value and Gel Consistency of rice was found significant
result at 1% level among all varieties,there was difference between all
varieties.
9. Functional properties of different varieties of flaked rice were
determined and found to be in Mahamaya and Rajeshwari varieties
WAI, WSI and SP more.WAI and SP were found significant in thin size
flaked rice among all varieties at 5% level.
10. Mean of Starch content, Amylose content and Amylopectin of
Mahamaya, Rajeshwari and Dokra Mecha was found 75.78, 71.69, 70.56
and 25.29, 20.82, 19.04 and 74.16,79.16, 81.39 respectively and it gives
significantly result among all varieties at 1% level.
11. Effect of puffing temperature on length, width and volume ratio was
determined and found that there was a significant difference among all
varieties at 1% level.
12. Product made from flaked rice and puffed rice has almost similar overall
acceptability All judges gave approximately equal points to each
product.
Conclusion
The physical properties such as length, width was increased during
processing into flaked rice. Mahamaya and Rajeshwari varieties had more amylose
as compared to Dokra Mecha, Flaking resulted in the damage of some starch
granules leading to their enhanced water absorption capacity, therefore its WAI,
WSI found high because high amylose content had high functional properties
water absorption index and water solubility index. After processing moisture
content, protein content and fat content were decreased significantly among all
varieties but ash content was found more. All these properties was found in
Rajeshwari variety followed by Mahamaya variety. After processing yield was
more in Rajeshwari varieties followed by Mahamaya and Dokra Mecha varieties.
The physical characteristics of rice varieties with lowest length, width and
good hulling and milling percentage, gives good length expansion ratio and
volume expansion ratio at 310˚C for preparation of puffed rice. Highest grain
weight and minimum protein content, maximum fat content, ash content which
could be the reason for better puffing volume. Maximum amylose content which
plays an important role in deciding the puffing characteristics. High-amylose
content rice varieties are hard to shear, there is a greater chance that pressure will
build up during the thermal treatment. This perhaps resulted in a sudden expansion
of the endosperm, making it a highly preferred product from puffing compared to
their low amylose content. All these properties was found in Mahamaya variety
followed by Rajeshwari variety.
Hence from the above we may be conclude that for puffed rice we may use
Mahamaya and Rajeshwari and for flaked rice we may use Mahamaya and
Rajeshwari. Both varieties found suitable for puffing and flaking.
Suggestion for future work.
1. Other varieties may be taken for making puffed rice and flaked rice which
are found in Chhattisgarh
2. Different temperature and machine may be studied for better puffing.
.
REFERENCES
Adekoyeni, O.O., Akinoso, R. and Fagbemi, A.S. 2015. Effect of paddy storage
and processing parameters on quality of Ofada rice in the production of
ready to eat flakes. African J. of food science Vol. 9(5), pp. 335-341.
Ananthachar TK, Narasimha HV, Shankara R, Gopal MS, Desikachar HSR 1982.
Improvement of the traditional process for rice flakes. J Food Sci Technol
19:47–50
Arya SS 1990. Grain based snack and convenience foods. Indian Food Packer
44:17–38
Bagheri, I., Alizadeh, M.R. and Safari, M. 2013. Varietal Differences in Physical
and Milling Properties of Paddy Grains. International J. of Agriculture and
Crop Sciences Vol., 5 (6), 606-611.
Basavaraj, Raviteja, G. and Deshpande S. 2015. Physical Properties of Rice for
Puffing. International J. of Latest Trends in Engineering and Technology
(IJLTET) Vol. 5 Issue 3.
Bello, M.O., Loubes, M.A., Aguerre, R.J. and Tolaba, M.P. 2015. Hydrothermal
treatment of rough rice: effect of processing conditions on product
attributes. J. Food Sci Technol 52(8): 5156–5163.
Berger, A., Rein, D., Schafer, A., Monnard, I., Gremaud, G., Bertoli, P.L.C., 2005.
Similar cholesterol-lowering properties of rice bran oil, with varied c-
oryzanol, in mildly hypercholesterolemic men. Eur. J. Nutr. 44, 163–173.
Bhatt, H.K. and Joshi, D.C. 2014. Standardization of pretreatments for production
of ready to-puff rice using microwave energy. J. of grain processing and
storage Vol 1 | Issue 2 | Pages 47-53.
Bhattacharya, K.R. and Swamy, Y.M.I. 1967. Conditions of drying parboiled
paddy for optimum milling quality. Contribution from Central food
technological Research Institute, Mysore, India. Vol. 44: 592-600.
Bhattacharya, K.R., 2011. Product making quality of rice. Rice quality: A guide to
rice properties and analysis. Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge.
Buggenhout, J.,Brijs, K., Celus, I. and Delcour, J.A. 2013. The breakage
susceptibility of raw and parboiled rice: A review. J. of Food Engineering
117: 304–315.
Chen ,Chiachung 2003. Evaluation of Air Oven Moisture Content Determination
Methods for Rough Rice. Biosystems Engineering 86 (4), 447–457.
Chitra, M., Singh, V. and Ali, S. Z. 2010. Effect of processing paddy on
digestibility of rice starch by in vitro studies. J Food Sci Technol
47(4):414–419.
Daomukda, N., Moongngarm, A., Payakapol, L. and Noisuwan, A. 2011. Effect of
Cooking Methods on Physicochemical Properties of Brown Rice. 2011 2nd
International Conference on Environmental Science and Technology
IPCBEE vol.6, IACSIT Press, Singapore.
Deepa C., Singh, Vasudeva 2011. Nutrient changes and functional properties of
rice flakes prepared in a small scale industry. Department of Grain Science
and Technology, Central Food Technological Research Institute, Mysore
(India).
Dutta, H. and Mahanta, C.L. 2012. Effect of hydrothermal treatment varying in
time and pressure on the properties of parboiled rices with different
amylose content. Food Research International 49: 655–663.
Dutta, H. and Mahanta, C.L. 2014. Traditional Parboiled Rice-Based Products
Revisited: Current Status and Future Research Challenges. Rice Science,
21(4): 187−200.
FAO (2012). www.faostat.org, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
(ON701)
FDA, 2006. Food and Drink Administration (FDA). 2006. Guidance for Industry
and FDA staff. Whole grain label statement draft guidance. Doi:
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/flgragui.html last accessed December 5th
2008.
Fofana M., Wanvoeke, J., Manful, J., Futakuchi, K., Van M. P., Zossou, E. and
Bleoussi, T. M. R. 2011. Effect of improved parboiling methods on the
physical and cooked grain characteristics of rice varieties in Benin.
International Food Research J. 18: 715-721.
Ghadge, P.N., and Prashad, K. 2012. Some Physical Properties of Rice Kernels:
Variety PR-106. J. Food Process Technology, Vol.3 • Issue 8 • 1000175.
Gupta, E., Sinha, J. and Dubey R.P. 2012. Utilization of Dehydrated Herbs in the
Formulation of Value Added Snack “Rice Flakes Mix”. J Food Process
Technol S1-002.
Hettiarachchy, N.S., Griffin, V.K., Gnanasambandam, R., Moldenhauer, K. and
Siebenmorgen, T. 1996. Physicochemical properties of three rice Varieties.
J. of Food Quality 20: 279 -289.
Hoke, K., Housova, J. and Houska M. 2005. Optimum conditions of rice puffing.
Czech J. of Food Science, 23: 1-11.
Itagi, H.N. and Singh, V. 2015. Status in physical properties of coloured rice
varieties before and after inducing retro-gradation. J. Of Food Sci Technol
52(12):7747–7758.
Jaybhaye RV, Pardeshi IL, Vengaiah PC and Srivastav PP 2014. Processing and
technology for millet based food products: a review. Journal of Ready to
Eat Food, 1(2): 32-48.
Joshi, N.D., Mohapatra, D. and Joshi, D.C. 2014a. Varietal Selection of Some
Indica Rice for Production of Puffed Rice. Food and Bioprocess
Technology, 7(1): 299-305.
Joshi, N.D., Mohapatra, D., Joshi, D.C. and Sutar, R.F. 2014b. Puffing
characteristics of parboiled milled rice in a domestic convective microwave
oven and process optimization. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 7(6):
1678-1688.
Jouki, M. and Khazaei, N. 2011. Some physical properties of rice seed (oryza
sativa). IIOABJ; Vol. 3; Issue 4:15–18.
Juliano B O. 1979. The chemical basis of rice quality. In: Proceedings of the
Workshop on Chemical Aspects of Rice Grain Quality. Manila,
Philippines: International Rice Research Institute: 69–90.
Kamaraddi, V. and Prakash, J. 2015. Assessment of suitability of selected rice
varieties for production of expanded rice. J. of food science and technology
1: 1112675.
Kanchana,S., Bharathi, S.L., Ilamaran,M. and Singaravadivel, K. 2012. Physical
Quality of Selected Rice Varieties. World J. of Agricultural Sciences 8 (5):
468-472.
Kumar, S. and Prasad, K. 2013. Effect of Paddy Parboiling and Rice Puffing on
Physical, Optical and Aerodynamic Characteristics. International J. of
Agriculture and Food Science Technology. ISSN 2249-3050, Vol. 4,
Number 8, pp. 765-770.
Kumar, S., Haq, R.-U. and Prasad, K. 2016. Studies on physico-chemical,
functional, pasting and morphological characteristics of developed extra
thin flaked rice. J. of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences.
Li, W., Bai, Y.,Mousaa, S.A.S., Zhang, Q., and She, Q. 2012. Effect of High
Hydrostatic Pressure on Physicochemical and Structural Properties of Rice
Starch. Food Bioprocess Tech. 5: 2233–2241.
Mahadevamma, S., and Tharanathan, R. N. 2007. Processed rice starch
characteristics and morphology. Eur Food Res Tech. 225:603–612.
Mahanta, C.L. and Bhattacharya, K.R. 2010. Relationship of starch changes to
puffing expansion of parboiled rice. J food Sci Technol 47(2):182-187.
Maisont, S. and Narkrugsa, W. 2009a. Effects of Some Physicochemical Properties
of Paddy Rice Varieties on Puffing Qualities by Microwave. Kasetsart J.
(Nat. Sci.) 43: 566 - 575.
Maisont, S. and Narkrugsa, W. 2009b. Effects of Salt, Moisture Content and
Microwave Power on Puffing Qualities of Puffed Rice. Kasetsart J. (Nat.
Sci.) 44 : 251 – 261.
McCabe WL, Smith JC, Harriott P. 1986. Unit operations of chemical engineering,
McGraw-Hill, New York.
Miah, M.A.K., Haque, A., Dauglass, M.P. and Clarke, B. 2002. Parboiling of rice.
Part I: Effect of hot soaking time on quality of milled rice. International J.
of Food Science and Technology , 37, 527–537.
Mir, S.A., Bosco, S.J.D. and Sunooj, K.V. 2013. Evaluation of physical properties
of rice cultivars grown in the temperate region of India. International Food
Research J. 20(4): 1521-1527.
Mishra, G., Joshi, D.C. and Panda, B.K. 2014.I Popping and Puffing of Cereal
Grains: A Review. Journal of Grain Processing and Storage Vol 1 Issue 2
Pages 34-46.
Mohsenin N. 1980. Physical properties of plant and animal materials, New York:
Gorden and Breach.
Mujoo, R. and Ali, S.Z. 1997. Susceptibility of Starch to in vitro Enzyme
Hydrolysis in Rice, Rice Flakes and Intermediary Products. Lebensm.-
Wiss. u.-Technol., 31, 114–121.
Narasimha HV 1995. Value addition to food grains through food processing: A
CFTRI approach. CFTRI Annual Report, p 68–72
Odenigbo, A.M., Ngadi, M., Ejebe, C., Nwankpa, C., Danbaba, N., Ndindeng, S.
and Manful, J. 2013. Study on the gelatinization properties and amylose
content of rice varieties from Nigeria and Cameroun. International J. of
Nutrition and Food Sciences 2(4): 181-186.
Odenigbo, A.M., Ngadi, M., Ejebe, C., Woin, N., Ndindeng, S.A. 2014.
Physicochemical, Cooking Characteristics and Textural Properties of TOX
3145 Milled Rice. J. of Food Research; Vol. 3, No. 2.
Oko, A.O., Ubi, B.E. and Dambaba, N. 2012. Rice Cooking Quality and Physico
Chemical Characteristics: a Comparative Analysis of Selected Local and
Newly Introduced Rice Varieties in Ebonyi State, Nigeria. Food and Public
Health, 2(1): 43-49.
Pal, V., Garg, S.K., and Pandey, J.P. 2013. Effect of degree of polishing on
physical and milling properties of rice. International Journal of Processing
and Post Harvest Technology. Vol. 4 | Issue 2 | 90-93.
Ranganna, S. 1986. Handbook of analysis and quality control of fruits and
vegetable products. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill publications.
Reddy, B.S. and Chakraverty, A. 2004. Physical Properties of Raw and Parboiled
Paddy. Biosystems Engineering 88 (4), 461–466.
Saeed, F., Pasha, I., Anjum, F.M., Suleria, H.A.R. and Farooq, M. 2011. Effect of
parboiling on physico-chemical & cooking attributes of different rice
cultivars. Internet J. of Food Safety, Vol.13, p. 237-245.
Sailaja, Y.S. 1992. Popping and flaking quality of sorghum cultivars in relation to
physicochemical characteristics and in vitro starch and protein digestibility.
Department of Foods and Nutrition College of Home Science Andhra
Pradesh Agricultural University Rajendranagar. Hyderabad - 500030.
Sarla 2013 Studies on test milling of some common varieties of summer paddy and
kharif paddy grown in the state. Department of agricultural processing and
food engineering, Faculty of agricultural engineering Indira Gandhi Krishi
Vishwavidhyalaya, Raipur (C.G.)
Shih, F., King, J., Daigle, K., An, H. J., & Ali, R. 2007. Physicochemical
properties of rice starch modified by hydrothermal treatments. Cereal
Chemistry, 527–531.
Sreenarayanan VV, Subramanian V, Visvanathan R. 1985. Physical and thermal
properties of soyabean. Proceedings of Indian Society of Agricultural
Engineers 3:pp. 161–169.
Takhellambam, R.D., Chimmad, B.V. and Parkasam, J.N. 2016. Ready-to-cook
millet flakes based on minor millets for modern consumer. J. Food Sci
Technol 53(2):1312–1318.
Thomas, R.,Wan-Nadiah, W.A. and Bhat, R. 2013. Physiochemical properties,
proximate composition, and cooking qualities of locally grown and
imported rice varieties marketed in Penang, Malaysia. International Food
Research J. 20(3): 1345-1351. Thumrongchote, D., Suzuki, T., Laohasongkram, K. and Chaiwanichsiri, S. 2012.
Properties of Non-glutinous Thai Rice Flour: Effect of rice variety.
Research J. of Pharmaceutical, Biological and Chemical Sciences Vol. 3
Issue 1 Page No. 150.
Varnamkhasti, M.G., Mobli, H., Jafari, A., Rafiee, S., Heidarysoltanabadi, M. and
Kheiralipour, K. 2007. Some Engineering Properties of Paddy (var.
Sazandegi). International J. of Agriculture & Biology 1560–8530/09–5–
763–766.
Vengaiah, P.C., Srivastav, P.P. and Mjumdar, G.C. 2015. Design related physical
properties of major cereals. J. of Global Biosciences, Vol. 4, special issue 1,
pp. 1910-1914.
Venkatachalapathy, N. and Udhayakumar, R. 2013. Effects of Continuous
Steaming on Milling Characteristics of Two Indica Rice Varieties. Rice
Science, 20(4): 309−312.
Verma, D. K., Mohan, M., Prabhakar, P. K. and Srivastav, P. P. 2014. Physico-
chemical and cooking characteristics of Azad basmati. International Food
Research J. 22(4): 1380-1389.
Villareal, C.P. and Juliano B.O. 1987. Varietal differences in quality characteristics
of puffed rices. Cereal Chemistry, 64(4):337-342.
Yadav, R.B., Khatkar, B.S. and Yadav, B.S. 2007. Morphological,
physicochemical and cooking properties of some Indian rice (Oryza sativa
L.) cultivars. J. of Agricultural Technology 3(2): 203-210.
Zareiforoush, H., Komarizadeh, M.H. and Alizadeh, M.R. 2009. Effect of Moisture
Content on Some Physical Properties of Paddy Grains. Research J. of
Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology 1(3): 132-139.
APPENDIX-A
Table: 1(a) Physical properties of mahamaya variety of paddy
S.
No.
Length
(mm)
Width
(mm)
Thickness
(mm)
GMD
(mm)
Sphericity
(%)
Aspect
ratio (%)
Surface
area (mm²)
1. 10.31 3.08 2.18 4.11 39.83 29.87 52.94
2. 10.13 2.99 2.02 3.94 38.90 29.52 48.75
3. 9.36 3.03 2.3 4.03 43.01 32.37 50.88
4. 8.93 3.02 2.14 3.86 43.28 33.82 46.89
5. 9 2.59 2.2 3.72 41.28 28.78 43.34
6. 9.81 2.92 2.23 4.00 40.75 29.77 50.18
7. 9.27 2.9 2.14 3.86 41.64 31.28 46.79
8. 10.07 2.72 2.16 3.90 38.69 27.01 47.68
9. 8.96 2.75 2.18 3.77 42.11 30.69 44.70
10. 9.71 2.77 2.25 3.93 40.43 28.53 48.40
11. 9.53 3.04 2.25 4.02 42.23 31.90 50.86
12. 9.53 2.92 2.45 4.09 42.87 30.64 52.40
13. 9.47 2.94 2.03 3.84 40.52 31.05 46.24
14. 9.83 2.8 2.11 3.87 39.40 28.48 47.09
15. 9.82 2.91 2.12 3.93 39.99 29.63 48.43
16. 8.85 3.12 2.18 3.92 44.28 35.25 48.23
17. 8.9 3.02 2.34 3.98 44.68 33.93 49.66
18. 9.18 3.05 2.25 3.98 43.34 33.22 49.71
19. 9.86 2.6 2.14 3.80 38.54 26.37 45.34
20. 9.02 3.13 2.13 3.92 43.43 34.70 48.20
21. 9.52 3.15 2.26 4.08 42.83 33.09 52.20
22. 9.33 2.87 2.36 3.98 42.69 30.76 49.82
23. 9.76 2.91 2.26 4.00 41.02 29.82 50.34
24. 9.54 2.89 2.02 3.82 40.03 30.29 45.79
25. 9.58 2.91 2.1 3.88 40.53 30.38 47.34
26. 9.17 2.94 2.16 3.88 42.27 32.06 47.17
27. 9.36 2.79 2.28 3.90 41.72 29.81 47.88
28. 9.43 3.03 2.02 3.86 40.98 32.13 46.90
29. 9.33 2.94 2.18 3.91 41.91 31.51 48.02
30. 9.43 2.78 2.02 3.76 39.82 29.48 44.28
31. 9.52 2.96 2.19 3.95 41.51 31.09 49.04
32. 9.25 2.86 2.51 4.05 43.78 30.92 51.49
33. 9.59 2.96 2.14 3.93 40.99 30.87 48.52
34. 9.47 2.89 2.02 3.81 40.23 30.52 45.57
35. 9.65 3.03 2.16 3.98 41.27 31.40 49.80
36. 9.74 2.94 2.1 3.92 40.22 30.18 48.20
37. 10.3 3.09 2.04 4.02 39.02 30.00 50.72
38. 9.62 2.79 2.22 3.91 40.60 29.00 47.90
39. 9.96 2.93 2.23 4.02 40.38 29.42 50.80
40. 9.16 3.13 2.32 4.05 44.23 34.17 51.55
41. 9.7 3.01 2.15 3.97 40.97 31.03 49.60
42. 9.97 2.97 2.21 4.03 40.42 29.79 50.99
43. 9.36 2.91 2.23 3.93 42.00 31.09 48.52
44. 9.97 2.99 2.07 3.95 39.64 29.99 49.03
45. 9.43 2.89 2.16 3.89 41.25 30.65 47.52
46. 9.52 2.82 2.2 3.89 40.91 29.62 47.62
47. 10.01 3.01 2.19 4.04 40.37 30.07 51.27
48. 9.71 3.1 2.17 4.03 41.48 31.93 50.93
49. 9.17 2.67 2.28 3.82 41.68 29.12 45.86
50. 9.06 2.08 2.93 3.81 42.03 22.96 45.53
51. 9.21 2.96 2.09 3.85 41.78 32.14 46.49
52. 9.55 2.68 2.05 3.74 39.20 28.06 44.01
53. 9.93 2.89 2.23 4.00 40.28 29.10 50.24
54. 9.11 3.07 2.15 3.92 43.00 33.70 48.19
55. 9.85 3.08 2.02 3.94 40.03 31.27 48.81
56. 8.86 2.97 2.25 3.90 43.99 33.52 47.70
57. 9.78 3.11 2.08 3.98 40.74 31.80 49.85
58. 9.64 3.15 2.02 3.94 40.91 32.68 48.84
59. 9.6 2.84 2.2 3.91 40.78 29.58 48.11
60. 9 2.66 2.08 3.68 40.88 29.56 42.50
61. 9.14 3.21 2.04 3.91 42.80 35.12 48.05
62. 10.13 2.78 1.98 3.82 37.71 27.44 45.83
63. 9.88 3.23 1.85 3.89 39.41 32.69 47.61
64. 9.87 2.57 2.27 3.86 39.12 26.04 46.82
65. 9.32 2.55 2.01 3.63 38.93 27.36 41.34
66. 9.17 3.22 2.12 3.97 43.30 35.11 49.50
67. 9.44 2.88 2.25 3.94 41.74 30.51 48.75
68. 9.73 3.05 2.24 4.05 41.63 31.35 51.53
69. 9.84 3.15 2.16 4.06 41.27 32.01 51.77
70. 9.34 2.71 2.2 3.82 40.89 29.01 45.79
71. 10.03 2.88 2.21 4.00 39.85 28.71 50.16
72. 9.6 2.99 2.23 4.00 41.67 31.15 50.25
73. 9.62 2.98 2.08 3.91 40.61 30.98 47.93
74. 10.13 2.91 2.13 3.97 39.24 28.73 49.60
75. 9.66 3.04 2.27 4.05 41.97 31.47 51.62
76. 8.62 2.51 2.01 3.52 40.80 29.12 38.83
77. 10.4 3.17 2.06 4.08 39.23 30.48 52.27
78. 9.28 2.98 2.12 3.88 41.86 32.11 47.39
79. 9.61 2.94 2.19 3.96 41.16 30.59 49.12
80. 9.17 3.12 2.09 3.91 42.64 34.02 48.01
81. 8.96 3.1 2.1 3.88 43.28 34.60 47.23
82. 9.21 3.02 2.33 4.02 43.61 32.79 50.66
83. 8.83 3.26 2.29 4.04 45.75 36.92 51.24
84. 9.77 2.91 2.23 3.99 40.81 29.79 49.93
85. 10.22 2.87 2.27 4.05 39.66 28.08 51.58
86. 10.25 3.12 2.2 4.13 40.28 30.44 53.51
87. 9.68 3.2 2.15 4.05 41.87 33.06 51.59
88. 9.1 2.99 2.23 3.93 43.18 32.86 48.49
89. 9 2.86 2.02 3.73 41.47 31.78 43.74
90. 9.86 3.19 2.24 4.13 41.89 32.35 53.56
91. 8.98 2.93 2.21 3.87 43.14 32.63 47.13
92. 8.41 2.95 2.11 3.74 44.48 35.08 43.94
93. 9.41 3.23 2.16 4.03 42.87 34.33 51.10
94. 9.61 2.87 2.04 3.83 39.87 29.86 46.11
95. 9.23 3.29 2.11 4.00 43.35 35.64 50.28
96. 9.51 3.06 2.28 4.05 42.57 32.18 51.46
97. 8.99 3.15 1.96 3.81 42.43 35.04 45.69
98. 10.45 3.01 2.21 4.11 39.35 28.80 53.09
99. 9.71 3.08 2.19 4.03 41.51 31.72 51.02
100. 9.81 2.66 2.15 3.83 39.02 31.73 46.02
Table: 1(b) Physical properties of Rajeshwari variety of paddy
S.
No.
Length
(mm)
Width
(mm)
Thickness
(mm)
GMD
(mm)
Sphericity
(%)
Aspect ratio
(%)
Surface area
(mm²)
1. 9.40 2.94 1.88 3.73 39.70 31.28 43.72
2. 8.66 2.94 2.24 3.85 44.45 33.95 46.52
3. 9.00 3.05 2.14 3.89 43.19 33.89 47.45
4. 9.34 2.92 2.27 3.96 42.36 31.26 49.14
5. 9.82 3.07 2.14 4.01 40.84 31.26 50.51
6. 9.06 3.17 2.26 4.02 44.36 34.99 50.71
7. 9.30 2.87 2.29 3.94 42.36 30.86 48.72
8. 9.92 3.09 3.26 4.64 46.78 31.15 67.62
9. 10.26 2.97 2.26 4.10 39.95 28.95 52.76
10. 9.89 2.75 2.15 3.88 39.25 27.81 47.31
11. 9.50 2.80 2.06 3.80 39.98 29.47 45.30
12. 9.42 2.63 2.18 3.78 40.13 27.92 44.86
13. 9.42 2.86 2.06 3.81 40.49 30.36 45.69
14. 8.77 3.05 2.32 3.96 45.14 34.78 49.22
15. 10.20 3.02 2.44 4.22 41.37 29.61 55.92
16. 9.64 3.18 2.07 3.99 41.38 32.99 49.96
17. 9.37 2.83 2.13 3.84 40.95 30.20 46.22
18. 9.02 2.86 2.08 3.77 41.82 31.71 44.67
19. 9.66 2.70 2.18 3.85 39.81 27.95 46.43
20. 9.69 2.85 2.30 3.99 41.18 29.41 49.99
21. 9.70 2.95 2.25 4.01 41.32 30.41 50.44
22. 8.71 3.11 2.16 3.88 44.57 35.71 47.32
23. 9.13 3.02 2.16 3.91 42.77 33.08 47.89
24. 9.34 3.09 2.12 3.94 42.19 33.08 48.76
25. 9.21 2.82 2.14 3.82 41.44 30.62 45.73
26. 9.54 2.80 2.15 3.86 40.44 29.35 46.74
27. 9.59 3.13 1.94 3.88 40.42 32.64 47.17
28. 9.60 2.96 2.16 3.94 41.09 30.83 48.86
29. 8.73 3.02 2.14 3.84 43.93 34.59 46.19
30. 9.46 2.95 2.22 3.96 41.83 31.18 49.16
31. 9.84 2.49 2.01 3.67 37.25 25.30 42.19
32. 8.69 2.87 2.11 3.75 43.12 33.03 44.09
33. 9.12 2.89 2.26 3.91 42.82 31.69 47.89
34. 9.04 2.95 2.21 3.89 43.05 32.63 47.55
35. 9.47 2.79 2.07 3.80 40.08 29.46 45.24
36. 9.07 2.78 2.12 3.77 41.53 30.65 44.56
37. 8.98 2.80 2.14 3.78 42.04 31.18 44.75
38. 9.63 2.90 2.22 3.96 41.10 30.11 49.19
39. 8.94 3.05 2.17 3.90 43.59 34.12 47.68
40. 9.71 2.91 2.28 4.01 41.29 29.97 50.46
41. 9.38 2.78 2.09 3.79 40.42 29.64 45.14
42. 8.81 2.93 2.06 3.76 42.68 33.26 44.40
43. 9.66 2.91 2.14 3.92 40.56 30.12 48.21
44. 9.44 2.73 2.21 3.85 40.76 28.92 46.48
45. 9.42 2.86 2.21 3.90 41.45 30.36 47.88
46. 9.98 2.50 2.21 3.81 38.14 25.05 45.49
47. 9.33 2.81 2.15 3.83 41.10 30.12 46.16
48. 8.90 2.87 2.20 3.83 43.04 32.25 46.07
49. 8.92 2.90 2.20 3.85 43.12 32.51 46.46
50. 9.64 2.93 2.19 3.95 41.03 30.39 49.11
51. 9.54 2.71 1.96 3.70 38.79 28.41 43.00
52. 8.89 2.79 2.17 3.78 42.47 31.38 44.76
53. 8.05 3.11 2.19 3.80 47.19 38.63 45.32
54. 9.53 2.78 2.20 3.88 40.68 29.17 47.20
55. 9.34 2.98 2.16 3.92 41.94 31.91 48.19
56. 9.13 2.87 2.15 3.83 41.99 31.43 46.14
57. 9.30 2.75 2.18 3.82 41.08 29.57 45.83
58. 9.64 2.72 2.26 3.90 40.44 28.22 47.73
59. 9.29 2.98 2.25 3.96 42.67 32.08 49.34
60. 9.60 2.89 2.29 3.99 41.57 30.10 50.00
61. 8.77 2.87 2.15 3.78 43.13 32.73 44.92
62. 9.74 2.67 2.10 3.79 38.95 27.41 45.20
63. 8.87 2.90 2.11 3.79 42.69 32.69 45.01
64. 9.46 3.18 2.19 4.04 42.69 33.62 51.22
65. 10.46 2.89 2.13 4.01 38.32 27.63 50.44
66. 10.51 3.02 1.91 3.93 37.38 28.73 48.46
67. 8.58 3.05 1.98 3.73 43.45 35.55 43.64
68. 9.49 2.79 2.22 3.89 40.97 29.40 47.47
69. 9.18 2.99 1.91 3.74 40.77 32.57 43.98
70. 9.48 2.92 1.92 3.76 39.66 30.80 44.39
71. 8.95 3.05 2.18 3.90 43.62 34.08 47.86
72. 9.08 2.94 2.14 3.85 42.42 32.38 46.58
73. 9.43 2.99 2.20 3.96 41.98 31.71 49.20
74. 10.08 2.61 2.12 3.82 37.90 25.89 45.84
75. 9.58 3.09 2.20 4.02 42.00 32.25 50.83
76. 9.88 2.67 2.26 3.91 39.54 27.02 47.92
77. 9.15 2.80 2.10 3.78 41.26 30.60 44.75
78. 9.41 2.98 2.26 3.99 42.37 31.67 49.91
79. 9.51 2.26 2.13 3.58 37.62 23.76 40.18
80. 9.47 3.00 2.15 3.94 41.59 31.68 48.70
81. 9.90 2.91 2.13 3.94 39.84 29.39 48.85
82. 9.11 2.84 2.18 3.83 42.10 31.17 46.18
83. 9.18 2.99 2.22 3.94 42.87 32.57 48.62
84. 10.08 3.02 2.16 4.04 40.04 29.96 51.15
85. 10.06 2.09 1.99 3.47 34.51 20.78 37.84
86. 9.86 2.86 2.20 3.96 40.15 29.01 49.21
87. 9.25 2.94 2.17 3.89 42.09 31.78 47.60
88. 10.00 2.90 2.27 4.04 40.38 29.00 51.19
89. 9.05 3.06 2.13 3.89 43.01 33.81 47.58
90. 9.69 2.73 2.09 3.81 39.31 28.17 45.57
91. 9.73 3.13 2.22 4.07 41.87 32.17 52.11
92. 9.78 2.94 2.12 3.94 40.24 30.06 48.63
93. 11.15 3.07 2.23 4.24 38.05 27.53 56.50
94. 9.56 3.06 2.24 4.03 42.17 32.01 51.04
95. 9.91 2.69 2.19 3.88 39.15 27.14 47.25
96. 9.08 3.08 2.17 3.93 43.28 33.92 48.49
97. 9.57 2.57 2.20 3.78 39.52 26.85 44.92
98. 9.24 2.85 2.22 3.88 42.00 30.84 47.30
99. 9.48 2.99 2.11 3.91 41.25 31.54 48.02
100. 9.55 2.86 2.28 3.96 41.50 30.74 49.33
Table:1(c) Physical properties of Dokra mecha variety of paddy
Length
(mm)
Width
(mm)
Thickness
(mm)
GMD
(mm)
Sphericity
(%)
Aspect ratio
(%)
Surface area
(mm²)
1. 12.48 3.59 1.72 4.26 34.10 28.77 56.86
2. 12.76 2.68 1.99 4.08 32.00 21.00 52.34
3. 12.48 3.20 2.19 4.44 35.57 25.64 61.87
4. 12.44 3.22 2.09 4.37 35.17 25.88 60.09
5. 11.57 2.83 1.84 3.92 33.88 24.46 48.26
6. 11.60 3.48 1.91 4.26 36.69 30.00 56.88
7. 11.51 3.22 1.94 4.16 36.13 27.98 54.29
8. 11.97 3.13 2.18 4.34 36.25 26.15 59.11
9. 12.60 3.32 2.30 4.58 36.37 26.35 65.93
10. 12.16 3.31 2.15 4.42 36.37 27.22 61.43
11. 12.06 3.37 2.16 4.44 36.85 27.94 62.02
12. 11.94 3.42 2.11 4.42 36.99 28.64 61.25
13. 12.69 3.37 2.15 4.51 35.57 26.56 63.97
14. 12.50 3.22 1.89 4.24 33.90 25.76 56.37
15. 11.88 3.51 1.95 4.33 36.47 29.55 58.93
16. 11.66 3.37 1.79 4.13 35.40 28.90 53.50
17. 12.61 3.36 2.04 4.42 35.06 26.65 61.38
18. 12.60 2.78 2.02 4.14 32.83 22.06 53.72
19. 12.49 2.74 2.15 4.19 33.55 21.94 55.14
20. 11.93 3.21 1.77 4.08 34.18 26.91 52.20
21. 12.43 3.47 1.92 4.36 35.07 27.92 59.66
22. 12.54 3.28 1.93 4.30 34.27 26.16 58.00
23. 12.37 3.42 1.88 4.30 34.77 27.65 58.07
24. 12.60 3.23 2.00 4.33 34.40 25.63 58.97
25. 11.89 3.15 2.06 4.26 35.80 26.49 56.91
26. 13.14 3.16 2.31 4.58 34.84 24.05 65.79
27. 11.92 3.32 1.89 4.21 35.35 27.85 55.74
28. 11.38 3.21 1.49 3.79 33.30 28.21 45.10
29. 12.36 3.30 1.95 4.30 34.79 26.70 58.07
30. 11.94 3.37 2.32 4.54 37.99 28.22 64.62
31. 11.98 3.72 1.90 4.39 36.65 31.05 60.55
32. 12.42 3.52 1.96 4.41 35.50 28.34 61.03
33. 11.79 3.60 2.39 4.66 39.56 30.53 68.30
34. 12.66 2.72 2.26 4.27 33.72 21.48 57.24
35. 12.19 3.18 2.03 4.29 35.15 26.09 57.66
36. 12.54 3.51 2.30 4.66 37.17 27.99 68.21
37. 13.00 3.45 2.34 4.72 36.28 26.54 69.86
38. 12.10 3.30 2.12 4.39 36.29 27.27 60.54
39. 12.86 3.48 1.93 4.42 34.37 27.06 61.35
40. 11.69 3.41 1.99 4.30 36.76 29.17 57.97
41. 12.23 3.22 1.58 3.96 32.40 26.33 49.30
42. 11.85 3.56 2.54 4.75 40.08 30.04 70.84
43. 12.72 3.01 2.04 4.27 33.61 23.66 57.37
44. 11.87 3.24 2.21 4.40 37.04 27.30 60.70
45. 12.38 3.07 1.89 4.16 33.58 24.80 54.26
46. 12.62 3.62 2.20 4.65 36.84 28.68 67.88
47. 13.20 3.79 2.00 4.64 35.17 28.71 67.67
48. 12.47 3.14 1.85 4.17 33.43 25.18 54.56
49. 12.36 3.49 2.28 4.62 37.35 28.24 66.90
50. 12.40 3.46 1.98 4.40 35.45 27.90 60.68
51. 11.55 3.35 2.15 4.37 37.80 29.00 59.84
52. 11.56 3.43 2.26 4.47 38.71 29.67 62.88
53. 12.42 3.71 2.19 4.66 37.49 29.87 68.06
54. 12.29 3.02 2.04 4.23 34.42 24.57 56.20
55. 12.05 3.16 2.36 4.48 37.17 26.22 63.00
56. 11.85 3.40 3.21 5.06 42.68 28.69 80.30
57. 11.72 3.29 2.01 4.26 36.38 28.07 57.08
58. 12.84 3.13 1.85 4.20 32.75 24.38 55.52
59. 12.25 3.46 1.87 4.30 35.07 28.24 57.94
60. 11.70 3.64 2.26 4.58 39.17 31.11 65.95
61. 11.55 3.34 2.27 4.44 38.45 28.92 61.92
62. 10.96 3.26 2.12 4.23 38.61 29.74 56.21
63. 11.28 2.87 1.73 3.83 33.92 25.44 45.96
64. 11.82 3.17 2.06 4.26 36.02 26.82 56.92
65. 12.22 3.41 2.31 4.58 37.50 27.91 65.95
66. 13.01 3.16 2.22 4.50 34.61 24.29 63.65
67. 11.74 3.49 2.19 4.48 38.13 29.73 62.93
68. 12.93 3.40 2.16 4.56 35.28 26.30 65.36
69. 12.24 3.45 1.78 4.22 34.48 28.19 55.93
70. 11.22 3.56 2.02 4.32 38.51 31.73 58.63
71. 12.03 3.37 1.83 4.20 34.93 28.01 55.44
72. 12.45 3.35 2.43 4.66 37.45 26.91 68.26
73. 12.66 3.14 2.00 4.30 33.96 24.80 58.06
74. 12.63 3.31 2.10 4.44 35.19 26.21 62.02
75. 11.96 3.49 2.23 4.53 37.89 29.18 64.49
76. 11.96 2.95 1.88 4.05 33.85 24.67 51.45
77. 12.04 3.46 2.20 4.51 37.45 28.74 63.83
78. 11.16 2.27 1.86 3.61 32.36 20.34 40.96
79. 12.33 3.45 2.09 4.46 36.20 27.98 62.55
80. 11.50 3.46 1.97 4.28 37.21 30.09 57.51
81. 10.87 3.21 2.54 4.46 41.02 29.53 62.42
82. 12.26 2.99 1.99 4.18 34.08 24.39 54.82
83. 11.82 3.00 1.73 3.94 33.37 25.38 48.84
84. 12.32 3.29 2.21 4.47 36.32 26.70 62.86
85. 11.79 3.40 2.32 4.53 38.43 28.84 64.45
86. 10.88 2.78 2.10 3.99 36.67 25.55 49.99
87. 11.59 2.44 1.81 3.71 32.04 21.05 43.29
88. 11.97 3.26 1.97 4.25 35.52 27.23 56.77
89. 12.26 3.24 2.36 4.54 37.05 26.43 64.80
90. 12.21 3.64 1.83 4.33 35.48 29.81 58.94
91. 11.22 3.83 2.14 4.51 40.23 34.14 63.97
92. 11.53 3.43 1.64 4.02 34.85 29.75 50.69
93. 11.94 3.21 2.04 4.28 35.81 26.88 57.41
94. 11.76 3.61 2.00 4.40 37.37 30.70 60.66
95. 12.79 3.68 2.37 4.81 37.64 28.77 72.76
96. 11.77 3.60 1.94 4.35 36.94 30.59 59.36
97. 11.77 3.47 1.94 4.30 36.49 29.48 57.93
98. 11.98 3.31 2.08 4.35 36.34 27.63 59.50
99. 12.19 3.29 2.12 4.40 36.07 26.99 60.71
100. 13.00 3.62 2.24 4.72 36.34 27.85 70.07
Table:1(d) Densities value of different variety of paddy
Varieties Mahamaya Rajeshwari Dokra Mecha
Bulk density
Avg. 0.71 0.71 0.47
Max. 0.69 0.69 0.46
Min. 0.72 0.74 0.48
S.D 0.01 0.01 0.07
True Density
Avg. 1.1 1.17 1.12
Max. 1.25 1.67 1.25
Min. 1.00 1.00 1.00
S.D 0.12 0.21 0.13
Angle of repose
Avg. 31.05 34.14 31.7
Max. 33.2 36.02 33.2
Min. 26.98 33.2 30.19
S.D 2.59 1.2 1.5
Table:1(e) Coefficient of friction of different variety of paddy
Varieties Mahamaya Rajeshwari Dokra Mecha
Avg. 0.24 0.23 0.22
Plywood Max. 0.28 0.26 0.24
Min. 0.19 0.19 0.21
S.D 0.02 0.02 0.01
Avg. 0.26 0.25 0.23
Glass Max. 0.3 0.28 0.28
Min. 0.23 0.21 0.21
S.D 0.02 0.02 0.02
Avg. 0.39 0.41 0.38
Mild steel Max. 0.42 0.46 0.42
Min. 0.38 0.36 0.36
S.D 0.01 0.03 0.01
Avg. 0.43 0.48 0.44
Rubber Max. 0.46 0.5 0.46
Min. 0.4 0.44 0.42
S.D 0.02 0.02 0.01
Table:1(f) Dimensional value of flaked rice (Mahamaya)
Thick size
Thin size
Length Width Thickness Length Width Thickness
1. 9.95 3.57 0.94 11.37 3.73 0.94
2. 8.15 3.04 1.45 11.5 4.57 0.77
3. 8.38 3.03 1.55 12.4 4.7 0.7
4. 8.54 3.25 1.31 11.54 4.17 0.77
5. 9.78 3.11 1.41 11.99 4.49 1.14
6. 8.32 3.28 1.29 12.48 4.05 0.73
7. 8.58 3.53 1.04 12.69 4.77 0.76
8. 9.21 3.57 1.38 13.08 4.39 0.78
9. 8.13 3.26 1.38 13.16 4.52 0.7
10. 8.66 3.57 1.06 11.32 4.37 0.81
11. 8.82 3.25 1.34 12.37 4.48 0.81
12. 8.7 3.38 1.13 13.83 5.31 0.65
13. 7.95 2.89 1.43 13.9 5.43 0.67
14. 9.43 3.38 1.05 11.91 4.31 0.63
15. 9.5 3.6 1.22 12.38 4.19 0.77
16. 8.45 3.13 1.46 11.99 4.36 0.7
17. 9.06 3.28 1.17 16.48 5.32 0.57
18. 8.34 3.14 1.33 12.33 4.07 0.87
19. 8.25 3.05 1.39 11.54 3.82 0.72
20. 8.29 2.89 1.29 10.38 3.66 0.89
21. 9.34 3.02 1.32 11.09 4.31 0.7
22. 8.52 2.99 1.52 12.3 4.15 0.68
23. 8.63 3.21 1.33 14.53 4.73 0.62
24. 7.87 2.99 1.43 10.8 3.9 0.92
25. 8.48 3.21 1.39 10.98 3.82 1
26. 8.9 3.61 1.15 11.38 4.55 0.69
27. 9.28 3.41 1.16 12 4.4 0.76
28. 8.15 2.94 1.48 10.04 3.81 0.87
29. 9.25 3.02 1.4 12.09 3.95 0.94
30. 8.92 3.44 1.33 12.1 4 0.86
31. 9.63 3.26 1.4 11.28 3.93 0.82
32. 7.74 2.95 1.43 12.98 3.96 0.84
33. 8.05 2.94 1.44 14.55 4.33 0.72
34. 8.29 2.92 1.3 12.19 4 0.71
35. 9.04 3.52 1.14 13.27 4.15 0.84
36. 9.68 3.67 1.02 14.08 5.75 0.66
37. 8.69 3.04 1.53 11.81 4.37 0.75
38. 7.85 3.07 1.55 9.9 4.04 0.83
39. 8.73 3 1.56 15.53 5.4 0.58
40. 9.52 3.48 1.23 12.59 4.05 0.89
41. 9.9 3.5 1.11 11.12 4.19 0.86
42. 8.49 2.94 1.34 12.14 3.99 0.76
43. 7.7 2.82 1.47 10.41 3.94 0.87
44. 8.29 2.71 1.49 12.38 4.63 0.55
45. 8.02 3.01 1.3 11.45 3.74 0.94
46. 8.08 3.04 1.38 13.79 4.01 0.65
47. 9.48 3.2 1.24 11.25 4.02 0.81
48. 8.46 3.16 1.27 12.6 4.53 0.7
49. 8.31 3.22 1.38 11.71 4.6 0.83
50. 7.98 3.16 1.5 12.26 4.3 0.73
Table:1(g) Dimensional value of flaked rice (Rajeshwari)
Thick size
Thin size
Length Width Thickness Length Width Thickness
1. 8.47 3.26 1.39 13.94 5.08 0.54
2. 8.48 3.36 1.4 11.61 4.32 0.77
3. 7.66 3.06 1.47 15.99 5.36 0.41
4. 8.86 3.16 1.43 16.93 5.77 0.43
5. 8.61 3.22 1.32 15.41 5.72 0.56
6. 10.28 3.41 1.08 16.51 6.21 0.63
7. 9.16 2.94 1.57 15.17 5.93 0.37
8. 8.7 3.07 1.59 16.18 6.19 0.47
9. 8.07 3.09 1.57 14.72 5.32 0.64
10. 8.61 3.21 1.43 12.02 5.47 0.5
11. 8.32 3.17 1.39 12.13 4.93 0.6
12. 8.13 2.96 1.43 13.8 4.42 0.62
13. 9.08 3.01 1.33 12.87 5.22 0.69
14. 8.17 3.25 1.38 15.29 5.47 0.64
15. 8.11 3.12 1.38 17.39 5.92 0.56
16. 8.42 3.07 1.6 16.26 5.68 0.63
17. 9.54 3.07 1.23 14.55 4.4 0.85
18. 9.16 3.59 1.36 16.82 5.56 0.58
19. 9.33 3.4 1.18 15.63 5.61 0.65
20. 8.72 3.29 1.46 15.28 5.21 0.48
21. 7.8 3.2 1.27 17.28 6.42 0.5
22. 9.08 3.6 1.21 14.76 5.67 0.55
23. 8.72 3.26 1.5 12.31 4.99 0.43
24. 9.97 3.65 1.27 14.16 5.11 0.46
25. 8.91 3.45 1.16 14.04 5.67 0.5
26. 9.74 3.76 1.3 15.95 5.42 0.63
27. 8.89 3.72 1.13 14.67 5.26 0.64
28. 8.55 3.2 1.34 16.85 6.25 0.5
29. 9.08 3.6 1.21 16.18 6.8 0.59
30. 7.58 2.84 1.55 14.57 5.06 0.57
31. 10.27 3.77 1.22 16.24 5.4 0.6
32. 9.1 3.4 1.43 15.8 5.53 0.37
33. 9.26 3.22 1.51 16.44 5.57 0.4
34. 8.12 3.45 1.36 17.82 5.86 0.49
35. 9.24 3.33 1.45 13.91 5.83 0.63
36. 8.21 3.42 1.34 16.06 6.63 0.56
37. 9.67 3.7 1.24 18.05 5.5 0.71
38. 9.01 3.23 1.39 15.1 5.67 0.43
39. 9.61 3.4 1.26 16.36 5.38 0.49
40. 8.08 3.07 1.37 14.54 5.26 0.52
41. 10.1 3.98 1.16 13.85 5.16 0.58
42. 8.73 3.76 1.23 13.21 6.26 0.42
43. 8.1 3.11 1.55 14.67 6.22 0.68
44. 8.49 3.4 1.5 15.07 6.03 0.51
45. 7.7 2.93 1.57 16.25 6.52 0.5
46. 8.67 4.05 1.44 18.36 5.33 0.6
47. 4.26 3.06 1.24 15.07 5.4 0.52
48. 7.98 3.08 1.5 16.25 6.63 0.68
49. 7.7 2.94 1.5 18.36 5.06 0.42
50. 8.98 3.26 1.36 15.07 5.03 0.45
Table:1(h) Dimensional value of flaked rice (Rajeshwari)
Thick size
Thin size
Length Width Thickness Length Width Thickness
1. 10.94 3.15 1.56 14.17 4.38 0.85
0.95 2. 9.51 2.86 1.28 14.93 4.85
3. 10.45 3.21 1.44 15.99 5.02 0.81
4. 10.16 2.76 1.43 15.15 4.32 0.85
5. 10.53 3.35 1.14 14.47 4.51 0.78
6. 10 3.12 1.48 14.26 4.34 0.89
7. 11.49 3.79 1.31 14.16 3.64 0.98
8. 11.18 3.62 1.28 14.2 4.67 0.91
9. 8.78 3.05 1.25 15.48 5.1 0.65
10. 9.76 3.27 1.18 13.73 4.8 0.86
11. 10.3 3.37 1.11 13.74 4.05 0.7
12. 9.68 3.27 1.32 14.05 4.2 0.94
13. 10.93 3.58 1.32 14.98 4.44 0.63
14. 10.6 2.76 1.67 13.43 3.7 0.68
15. 10.72 3.47 1.23 14.58 4.05 0.93
16. 10.28 2.8 1.25 13.52 4.48 0.78
17. 10.3 3.14 1.14 13.07 4.03 1.11
18. 9.44 2.93 1.05 12.68 4.02 0.86
19. 10.1 2.74 1.24 14.4 4.05 0.53
20. 10.02 3.53 1.38 13.82 3.59 0.9
21. 9.9 3.29 1.26 13.07 4.29 0.85
22. 9.63 3.06 0.83 13.89 4.31 0.9
23. 9.97 3.23 1.62 16.02 4.73 0.72
24. 9.52 3.04 1.23 12.57 4.49 0.73
25. 10.37 3.44 1.07 12.82 4.34 0.99
26. 9.75 2.96 1.43 14.42 4.22 0.94
27. 10.69 2.87 1.2 13.85 4.21 0.86
28. 9.94 2.94 1.37 12.29 4.16 0.67
29. 9.95 3.12 1.34 14.26 3.77 0.93
30. 9.31 2.72 0.82 13.73 4.11 0.81
31. 10.15 3.38 1.34 12.35 4.1 0.92
32. 10.05 2.81 1.5 12.75 4.16 0.78
33. 10.66 2.91 1.01 12.23 3.72 1.18
34. 9.51 2.9 1.09 13.43 4.22 0.86
35. 10.62 2.98 1.4 13.72 3.98 0.84
36. 10.13 3.12 1.05 14.16 4.37 0.83
37. 9.99 3.17 1.28 14.48 4.52 0.7
38. 9.77 2.68 1.32 14.19 4.66 0.89
39. 10.86 3.41 1.34 13.73 4.03 0.88
40. 9.41 2.69 0.93 14.57 4.05 0.92
41. 10.42 3.03 1.27 13.54 4.47 0.78
42. 9.61 3.14 1.5 16.02 4.72 0.72
43. 9.51 2.83 1.35 14.41 4.22 0.94
44. 10.72 3.36 1.31 13.07 4.29 0.84
45. 10.59 3 1.37 14.58 4.05 0.92
46. 10.02 3.32 1.41 13.53 4.46 0.8
47. 10.53 3.21 1.24 14.2 4.41 0.75
48. 10.09 3.17 1.2 12.68 4.32 0.95
49. 8.79 3.32 1.18 16.02 4.72 0.73
50. 10.05 3.08 1.44 13.07 4.03 1.1
Table (i) Volume expansion ratio of puffed rice
Table (j) Puffing yield of different varieties
310˚C
290˚C
270˚C
M R DO M R DO M R DO
79.82 75.2 77.85 76 71.36 72 70.95 55.36 56.12
79.78 75.06 77.8 75.98 70.97 71.97 70.9 55.34 56.08
79.7 75.24 77.77 75.82 71.22 71.95 70.86 55.05 56.17
79.23 75.56 77.89 76.06 71.38 72.09 70.88 55.19 56.1
79.85 75 77.51 75.93 71.24 72.2 70.85 55.42 56.15
79.55 75.29 77 75.87 71.09 72.18 70.96 55.46 56.23
79 75.17 77.83 75.96 70.98 72.14 70.92 55.08 56.19
79.47 75.37 77.55 76.01 71 72.16 70.89 55.14 56.04
79.91 75.22 77.09 75.94 71.96 72.13 70.9 55.29 56.02
79.33 75.41 77.63 75.92 71.18 72.05 70.87 55.31 56.14
Volume expansion ratio
310 290 270
Mahamaya 7.6230 5.4590 5.1148
7.7167 5.5763 5.0820
7.5484 5.6102 5.1724
Rajeshwari 5.8621 4.3103 3.8793
5.9298 4.2373 3.8983
5.8120 4.1967 3.8261
Dokra Mecha 7.5000 4.7833 4.1667
7.5424 4.7500 4.0635
7.3984 4.7414 4.2241
Appendix-B
Table:2(a) analysis of water absorption index of flaked rice Data File Name : mbdo1.csv
Result File Name : mbdo1r
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: WAI (Thick) Year:
Total: 28.5800 General Mean: 4.7633 CV %: 3.53
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.029479 1.044 NS 0.1188
Error 3 0.028225
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 4.868 2 4.793 3 4.630
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: WAI Thin Year:
Total: 42.1050 General Mean: 7.0175 CV %: 1.10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.077112 12.951 * 0.0546 0.25
Error 3 0.005954
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Significant at 5% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 6.818 2 7.025 3 7.210
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: WSI (Thick) Year:
Total: 6.8750 General Mean: 1.1458 CV %: 10.22
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.031354 2.288 NS 0.0828
Error 3 0.013704
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 1.025 2 1.137 3 1.275
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: WSI (Thin) Year:
Total: 4.2460 General Mean: 0.7077 CV %: 18.35
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.006605 0.392 NS 0.0918
Error 3 0.016871
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 0.663 2 0.772 3 0.688
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: SP (Thick) Year:
Total: 28.9110 General Mean: 4.8185 CV %: 3.41
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.027253 1.007 NS 0.1164 -
Error 3 0.027077
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 4.918 2 4.848 3 4.690
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: SP (Thin) Year:
Total: 42.4060 General Mean: 7.0677 CV %: 1.21
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.079033 10.798 * 0.0605 0.27
Error 3 0.007319
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Significant at 5% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 6.863 2 7.080 3 7.260
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Water uptake (Thick) Year:
Total: 2361.5000 General Mean: 393.5833 CV %: 3.71
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 229.291667 1.075 NS 10.3290 -
Error 3 213.375000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 400.500 2 399.000 3 381.250
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Water uptake (Thin) Year:
Total: 3862.0000 General Mean: 643.6667 CV %: 3.10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 46.166667 0.116 NS 14.0979
Error 3 397.500000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 644.500 2 648.000 3 638.500
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Amylose RICE Year:
Total: 138.3400 General Mean: 23.0567 CV %: 6.02
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD
(5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 13.357182 6.930 NS 0.9817 -
Error 3 1.927497
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 25.840 2 22.595 3 20.734
Data File Name : fat.csv
Result File Name : fatr
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: RICE Year:
Total: 8.7590 General Mean: 1.4598 CV %: 0.59
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.000550 7.489 NS 0.0061
Error 3 0.000073
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 1.446 2 1.478 3 1.456
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 270 Year:
Total: 5.9410 General Mean: 0.9902 CV %: 2.41
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.000375 0.661 NS 0.0168
Error 3 0.000568
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 0.978 2 0.988 3 1.005
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 290 Year:
Total: 5.8400 General Mean: 0.9733 CV %: 0.59
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.000017 0.500 NS 0.0041 -
Error 3 0.000033
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 0.975 2 0.975 3 0.970
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED AT 310 Year:
Total: 6.2000 General Mean: 1.0333 CV %: 4.77
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.014017 5.760 NS 0.0349
Error 3 0.002433
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 0.985 2 0.985 3 1.130
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THICK SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 5.9100 General Mean: 0.9850 CV %: 11.43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD
(5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.057050 4.498 NS 0.0796 -
Error 3 0.012683
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 1.085 2 1.080 3 0.790
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THIN SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 5.5800 General Mean: 0.9300 CV %: 8.26
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.054350 9.212 NS 0.0543
Error 3 0.005900
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 1.035 2 1.015 3 0.740
Table:2(b)Nutritional composition of puffed rice and flaked rice INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Protein RICE Year:
Total: 45.5210 General Mean: 7.5868 CV %: 2.04
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 2.250925 94.002 ** 0.1094 0.49
Error 3 0.023946
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 6.708 2 8.766 3 7.286
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 270 Year:
Total: 42.4420 General Mean: 7.0737 CV %: 1.16
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 2.850796 420.616 ** 0.0582 0.26
Error 3 0.006778
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 6.038 2 8.379 3 6.803
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 290 Year:
Total: 43.8260 General Mean: 7.3043 CV %: 0.76
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 2.200403 718.184 ** 0.0391 0.18
Error 3 0.003064
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 6.458 2 8.478 3 6.977
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED AT 310 Year:
Total: 42.6900 General Mean: 7.1150 CV %: 0.82
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 2.034169 595.046 ** 0.0413 0.19
Error 3 0.003419
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 6.231 2 8.214 3 6.901
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THICK SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 42.8780 General Mean: 7.1463 CV %: 0.27
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 4.107708 10919.682 ** 0.0137 0.06
Error 3 0.000376
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 5.658 2 8.517 3 7.264
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THIN SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 42.0240 General Mean: 7.0040 CV %:
0.97
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 3.442560 747.306 ** 0.0480 0.22
Error 3 0.004607
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 5.592 2 8.184 3 7.236
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Ash Content RICE Year:
Total: 3.0070 General Mean: 0.5012 CV %: 9.64
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.012191 5.224 NS 0.0342
Error 3 0.002334
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 0.467 2 0.590 3 0.446
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 270 Year:
Total: 23.0820 General Mean: 3.8470 CV %:
1.09
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.970925 548.445 ** 0.0298 0.13
Error 3 0.001770
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 3.419 2 3.470 3 4.651
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 290 Year:
Total: 25.0350 General Mean: 4.1725 CV %: 1.79
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.322554 57.877 ** 0.0528 0.24
Error 3 0.005573
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 3.902 2 3.981 3 4.634
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED AT 310 Year:
Total: 22.4840 General Mean: 3.7473 CV %: 6.82
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.568111 8.690 NS 0.1808 -
Error 3 0.065378
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 3.154 2 3.902 3 4.186
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THICK SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 20.8720 General Mean: 3.4787 CV %: 35.92
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 1.291120 0.827 NS 0.8836
Error 3 1.561538
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 2.553 2 3.996 3 3.888
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THIN SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 6.8350 General Mean: 1.1392 CV %: 5.24
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.932453 261.714 ** 0.0422 0.19
Error 3 0.003563
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 0.588 2 1.903 3 0.927
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Fat content RICE Year:
Total: 6.8410 General Mean: 1.1402 CV %: 0.44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.139855 5627.540 ** 0.0035 0.02
Error 3 0.000025
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 1.446 2 0.990 3 0.985
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 270 Year:
Total: 5.4060 General Mean: 0.9010 CV %: 0.44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.018278 1139.808 ** 0.0028 0.01
Error 3 0.000016
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 0.978 2 0.931 3 0.794
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 290 Year:
Total: 5.4000 General Mean: 0.9000 CV %: 1.11
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.025550 255.509 ** 0.0071 0.03
Error 3 0.000100
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 0.975 2 0.955 3 0.770
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED AT 310 Year:
Total: 5.4600 General Mean: 0.9100 CV %:
0.63
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.027450 823.925 ** 0.0041 0.02
Error 3 0.000033
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 0.985 2 0.970 3 0.775
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THICK SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 5.7100 General Mean: 0.9517 CV %: 8.15
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.044717 7.432 NS 0.0548 -
Error 3 0.006017
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 1.085 2 0.980 3 0.790
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THIN SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 5.5400 General Mean: 0.9233 CV %: 5.83
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.037717 13.006 * 0.0381 0.17
Error 3 0.002900
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Significant at 5% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 1.035 2 0.965 3 0.770
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Moisture RICE Year:
Total: 72.9000 General Mean: 12.1500 CV %:
0.51
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.076950 19.721 * 0.0442 0.20
Error 3 0.003902
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Significant at 5% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 12.285 2 11.925 3 12.240
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 270 Year:
Total: 43.0800 General Mean: 7.1800 CV %: 1.73
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 1.722350 111.136 ** 0.0880 0.40
Error 3 0.015498
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 6.490 2 8.235 3 6.815
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 290 Year:
Total: 43.6400 General Mean: 7.2733 CV %:
0.99
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 2.256867 434.181 ** 0.0510 0.23
Error 3 0.005198
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 6.800 2 8.490 3 6.530
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED AT 310 Year:
Total: 40.1100 General Mean: 6.6850 CV %: 1.51
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 2.074200 203.710 ** 0.0714 0.32
Error 3 0.010182
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 5.775 2 7.785 3 6.495
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THICK SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 41.4500 General Mean: 6.9083 CV %:
2.66
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.411717 12.223 * 0.1298 0.58
Error 3 0.033684
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Significant at 5% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 6.555 2 7.420 3 6.750
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THIN SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 42.2300 General Mean: 7.0383 CV %: 1.36
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.668717 73.101 ** 0.0676 0.30
Error 3 0.009148
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 6.630 2 7.700 3 6.785
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Amylopectin RICE Year:
Total: 454.1060 General Mean: 75.6843 CV %: 2.32
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 35.315874 11.453 * 1.2417 5.59
Error 3 3.083635
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Significant at 5% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 74.160 2 80.436 3 72.458
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: RICE starch Year:
Total: 452.9050 General Mean: 75.4842 CV %: 1.20
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 8.280631 10.086 * 0.6407 2.88
Error 3 0.821028
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Significant at 5% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 75.783 2 73.316 3 77.353
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Amyslose RICE Year:
Total: 34.0000 General Mean: 3.7778 CV %: 8.82
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 33.444444 301.000 ** 0.1925 0.67
Error 6 0.111111
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 0.000 2 6.333 3 5.000
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Year:
Total: 550.5000 General Mean: 61.1667 CV %: 1.12
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 8583.083333 18175.941 ** 0.3967 1.37
Error 6 0.472222
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 0.000 2 99.167 3 84.333
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Year:
Total: 165.8300 General Mean: 18.4256 CV %: 49.81
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 225.665500 2.680 NS 5.2984 -
Error 6 84.219224
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 8.418 2 23.092 3 23.766
_
RESUME
Name : Anita Lakra
Date of Birth : 26-February-1992
Present Address : New girl’s Hostel, University Campus,
Raipur (C.G)
Pin. – 492012
Mobile No. : 9406394251
E. mail : [email protected]
Permanent Address : M/658 Adarsh Nagar Kusmunda,Korba,
Dist-Korba,Post-Kusmunda (C.G)
Pin-495454
Academic Qualification
Exam/Degree Year University/Institute
B.Tech (Agril. Engg.) 2014 IGKV, Raipur
HSSC 2010 CGBSE, Korba
HSC 2008 CGBSE, Korba
Signature
