gluten quality prediction and correlation studies in spring wheats

GLUTEN QUALITY PREDICTION AND CORRELATION STUDIESIN SPRING WHEATS

IMRAN PASHA1,3, FAQIR MUHAMMAD ANJUM1, MASOOD SADIQ BUTT1

and JAVED IQBAL SULTAN2

1Institute of Food Science & Technology

2Institute of Animal Nutrition and Feed TechnologyUniversity of Agriculture

Faisalabad, Pakistan

ABSTRACT

Gluten, “cohesive, viscoelastic, proteinaceous material prepared as aby-product of the starch isolation from wheat flour” and the storage anddough-forming protein of wheat flour, is the key to the unique ability of wheatto suit the production of leavened products. Wet gluten was only affected bywheat varieties, while dry gluten was affected by wheat varieties, crop yearsand their interaction. The wet and dry gluten ranged 8.0–43.13% and 2.58–14.55%, respectively, and were positively correlated with Zeleny value,sodium dodecyl sulfate sedimentation value and falling number. The glutencontent was higher in Pavon, SA 42 and Faisalabad 85, while Zeleny valuewas higher in GA 02 and C 518, resulting in better gluten quality. Zeleny valuewas negatively correlated with crude protein content (r = –0.1857*). Thelowest amount of wet and dry gluten was detected in Triticale and durumwheats as compared to common wheats. Zeleny value and sedimentation valuemay be used as indicators of gluten content and quality while working onwheats. The information thus collected will be valuable for cereal chemistsand wheat breeders for improvements in their future breeding programs.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

This research work will be a breakthrough and helpful for wheat breeders,growers, millers and bakers for their intended uses as every consumer demandspecific wheat quality characteristics for their end products.

3 Corresponding author. TEL: +92-41-9200161/3013; FAX: +92-41-9201105; EMAIL: [email protected]

Journal of Food Quality 30 (2007) 438–449. All Rights Reserved.© 2007, The Author(s)Journal compilation © 2007, Blackwell Publishing

438

INTRODUCTION

Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is the cheapest and principal source ofenergy and protein for the inhabitants of Pakistan. It is one of the leadingcereal grains produced, consumed and processed in the country. Wheat qualityis determined by several physical, chemical and rheological properties, and themajor factor is gluten, which is roughly 78–85% of total wheat endospermprotein (Bushuk 1985; Menjivar 1990; Weegels et al. 1996). When flour andwater are mixed into dough and kneaded thoroughly under water either byhand or by machine, a cohesive, extensible and rubbery mass is obtained thatconsists principally of protein and water, i.e., gluten.

Protein quantity is influenced by environmental factors, while the qualityis genetically determined. Protein quality is based on the consideration of thepotential end use rather than nutritional characteristics. Gluten is an importantfactor in protein quality and it is formed by the interaction of storage wheatproteins, i.e., glutenin and gliadin, present in approximately equal proportions(Schofield 1994) and is also associated with lipid and pentosan during doughformation (Hoseney 1986). The flour gluten content is a useful indicator offlour quality, so the flour quality is influenced by the nature of the gluten andits various components.

Tests like the Pelshenke dough ball test, the Zeleny sedimentation test,water absorption capacity of flour and the sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)sedimentation volume (an estimate of the strength of the wheat or quality ofgluten and it depends on the degree of hydration of the proteins in the wheatand on their degree of oxidation) can give valuable information about thebaking quality of wheat. Both higher gluten content and a better gluten qualitygive rise to slower sedimentation and higher Zeleny test values (Hruskova andFamera 2003). The higher the SDS sedimentation volume, the more will be thestrength of the protein (Williams et al. 1986). The wet gluten test gives thedirect indication of the amount of gluten present in flour and the oxidationstatus (Williams et al. 1986). The sedimentation value of flour depends on thewheat protein composition and is mostly correlated to the protein content, thewheat hardness and the volume of pan and hearth loaves. A stronger correla-tion between loaf volume and Zeleny sedimentation volume compared to SDSsedimentation volume could be because of the protein content influencing boththe volume and Zeleny value (Shewry and Tatham 2000).

In Pakistan, very little work on gluten quality tests has been carried outso far, so the present study was planned to investigate the gluten quantityand quality in spring wheats by using different chemical tests and to find outthe relationship with different quality attributes. The information thusobtained will be helpful for wheat breeders, millers and bakers for theirintended use.

439GLUTEN QUALITY IN SPRING WHEATS

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty wheat cultivars (including one triticale T 96725 and one Durum 97variety) released since 1933–2003 and grown for two consecutive years i.e.,2003–2004 and 2004–2005, at the Wheat Research Institute, Faisalabad wereincluded in the present study. The wheat varieties were grown at one locationunder similar conditions. The fertilizer level of N–P2O2–K2O at the rate of90–60–60 kg/ha, respectively, was applied to each variety. Grain samples ofeach wheat variety were drawn in triplicate.

Analytical Tests

The flour samples of each wheat variety were subjected to differentanalytical tests like crude protein, ash content, dry and wet gluten accordingto method numbers 46-10, 08-01, and 38-10, respectively, given by theAACC (2000) on dry weight basis. The moisture content was estimatedaccording to method number 44-15 A (AACC 2000). The protein percentagewas calculated by multiplying the nitrogen percent with factor 5.7. Thewater absorption capacity of each wheat variety was calculated by usingInframatic 8620 (Perten Instruments, Inc., Springfield, IL). SDS sedimenta-tion value of each wheat variety was determined by using the methoddescribed by Williams et al. (1986). Sieved flour (3.0 g) (using UDY cyclonemill; UDY Corporation, Fort Collins, CO) was added in 50 mL ofCoomassie Blue solution (Fluka Chemicals GmbH, Bucks, Germany),shaking for 70 min with different intervals and shakings, then adding 50-mLSDS reagent solution for 50 min with intervals and shakings, and volume ofmoistened suspension was measured in cm3. SDS sedimentation test ofDurum wheat was estimated by method number 56-70 (AACC 2000).Zeleny sedimentation value of each wheat variety was estimated by usingNIR instrument, Inframatic 9100 (Perten Instruments AB, Sweden) follow-ing the method as adopted by Hruskova and Famera (2003). Each wheatvariety was tested for falling number using the Falling Number ApparatusFN 1900 (Perten Instruments AB, SE 14105, Huddinge, Sweden) (methodnumber 56-81 B; AACC 2000).

Statistical Analysis

The data collected were analyzed according to standard statistical proce-dure (Steel et al. 1996) using different statistical software like SPSS (version10.0.1, 1999). Each cultivar has triplicate samples. Pearson simple correlationwas conducted among different quality parameters.

440 I. PASHA ET AL.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Moisture content, Zeleny sedimentation value and SDS sedimentationvalue were significantly affected due to crop years and wheat varieties, whileinteraction between crop years ¥ varieties was nonsignificant (Table 1). Thecrude protein content was significantly affected by wheat varieties andinteraction between crop years and varieties, while the effect of crop yearswas nonsignificant. The effect of crop years and the interaction of wheatvarieties ¥ crop years on wet gluten was nonsignificant, while the effect ofvarieties was found to be highly significant in this parameter (Anjum andWalker 2000). Dry gluten was significantly affected by wheat varieties, cropyears and interaction between wheat varieties ¥ crop years. The water absorp-tion value for whole wheat flour of different wheat varieties were significantlyaffected due to crop years, while wheat varieties and their interaction with cropyears were nonsignificant. Highly significant differences in falling numberdue to wheat varieties, crop years and the interaction of crop years ¥ wheatvarieties were observed.

The moisture content is extremely important in any measurement ofwheat kernel texture and ultimately, wheat quality (Pomeranz and Williams1990). The mean values of moisture content ranged from 8.92 to 11.68%(Table 2). The difference between wheat varieties is because of the geneticvariability of different wheat varieties, and the difference between crop yearsis because of the environmental changes during crop years. The crude proteincontent ranged from 10.0 to 13.4% and found to be highest in Chenab 70 andBarani 83 while lowest in Sandal 73 and Pari 73 wheat varieties. Proteincontent is an important criterion while considering the quality of wheat. It hasbeen reported to be influenced by genetic as well as nongenetic factors likesoil, climatic conditions and use of fertilizer, etc. (Bushuk et al. 1969; Subda1991; Kent and Evers 1994). The ash content on the average of two crop yearsranged from 1.17–1.65%, which was highest in Manthar 2003 and MexiPak65, while the lowest ash content was found in MH 97 and Punjab 96 wheatvarieties. The results of the present study are in conformity with the earlierstudies reported by Paliwal and Singh (1985), Butt et al. (2001) and Ahmad(2001).

The Zeleny sedimentation value (NIR) ranged from 50.67 to 80.34 andfound to be highest in GA 2002 and C 518, while the lowest was found inwheat varieties, i.e., Bakhar 2002 and Punjab 81. Hruskova and Famera(2003) evaluated 318 wheat samples for Zeleny sedimentation value throughthe NIR technique and found a range from 17 to 66 mL. Konopka (2004)reported Zeleny sedimentation value in the range of 29.5–62.0, 28.5–60and 22.0–42.0 cm3 in quality wheat, bread wheat and nonbread wheat,respectively.


TAB

LE

1.E

FFE

CT

OF

GE

NO

TY

PE¥

EN

VIR

ON

ME

NT

ON

DIF

FER

EN

TQ

UA

LIT

YPA

RA

ME

TE

RS

INSP

RIN

GW

HE

AT

VA

RIE

TIE

S

Sour

cedf

Mea

nsq

uare

s

Cru

depr

otei

nW

etgl

uten

Dry

glut

enSD

SZ

elen

yva

lue

Wat

erab

sorp

tion

Yea

r1

10.3

34N

S91

.246

NS

122.

420*

*29

2.25

1**

929.

069*

*37

1.69

7**

Sam

ple

42.

644

22.8

720.

588

1.02

36.

059

1.23

8V

arie

ties

493.

357*

*31

9.76

9**

33.2

98**

67.1

04**

314.

870*

*5.

145*

Yea

r¥

vari

etie

s49

1.54

2*6.

956N

S3.

567*

*4.

075N

S21

.447

NS

1.30

3NS

Err

or19

61.

038

13.8

211.

685

4.61

122

.771

3.24

5

*Si

gnifi

cant

;**

high

lysi

gnifi

cant

.N

S,no

nsig

nific

ant;

SDS s

ed,s

odiu

mdo

decy

lsu

lfat

ese

dim

enta

tion

valu

e.

442 I. PASHA ET AL.

TAB

LE

2.M

EA

NV

AL

UE

SFO

RD

IFFE

RE

NT

QU

AL

ITY

PAR

AM

ET

ER

SO

FW

HE

AT

VA

RIE

TIE

S

Whe

atva

riet

ies

Cru

depr

otei

nW

etgl

uten

Dry

glut

enSD

SZ

elen

yva

lue

Wat

erab

sorp

tion

C-5

1811

.27

�0.

3640

.25

�1.

3512

.84

�0.

6625

.17

�1.

5677

.50

�1.

9562

.65

�0.

80C

-591

12.2

9�

0.42

29.4

2�

2.31

11.4

0�

0.57

25.8

3�

1.29

74.1

7�

2.09

62.6

3�

0.31

C-2

2812

.15

�0.

7533

.49

�2.

3112

.44

�0.

5723

.33

�0.

5469

.83

�2.

5062

.75

�0.

30C

-217

10.5

6�

0.35

41.1

0�

3.03

13.3

1�

0.59

25.3

3�

0.30

66.5

0�

1.38

62.6

3�

0.88

C-2

5010

.43

�0.

2836

.03

�1.

6012

.34

�0.

7620

.33

�0.

8069

.50

�2.

1662

.27

�0.

39C

-271

11.4

1�

0.46

39.1

2�

1.89

13.6

0�

0.85

21.8

3�

0.85

67.5

0�

1.82

63.5

3�

0.74

C-2

7311

.71

�0.

4041

.65

�2.

0413

.64

�0.

8022

.33

�1.

0775

.17

�2.

7563

.20

�0.

08D

irk

10.4

3�

0.30

25.1

0�

1.19

11.0

2�

0.58

25.8

3�

1.47

67.0

0�

2.03

62.3

8�

0.41

M.P

ak-6

511

.95

�0.

6936

.92

�2.

7712

.06

�0.

6723

.83

�1.

6253

.00

�1.

9961

.43

�0.

66B

aran

i-70

12.5

6�

0.48

39.2

3�

1.18

13.0

7�

1.04

24.0

0�

1.07

60.6

7�

1.62

62.0

3�

0.54

Che

nab-

7013

.40

�0.

4532

.47

�2.

2811

.93

�0.

8222

.17

�1.

2161

.83

�2.

1062

.17

�0.

67SA

-42

12.3

5�

0.55

41.9

2�

1.20

12.7

2�

0.93

26.1

7�

0.46

68.8

3�

2.43

63.6

4�

0.18

Lyp-

7312

.11

�0.

3938

.42

�1.

7712

.82

�0.

5424

.50

�0.

6765

.67

�2.

3062

.02

�0.

82Pa

ri-7

310

.40

�0.

4134

.45

�2.

499.

675

�0.

6225

.50

�1.

3460

.50

�1.

7661

.03

�0.

49Po

thw

ar11

.68

�0.

3534

.39

�2.

1111

.99

�0.

8436

.00

�0.

2071

.17

�2.

0563

.08

�0.

92Sa

ndal

-73

10.0

0�

0.30

38.4

7�

1.97

12.9

7�

0.95

34.1

7�

1.33

65.6

7�

1.98

61.3

1�

0.60

Yac

ora-

7012

.51

�0.

3237

.61

�1.

5612

.62

�0.

6227

.33

�1.

5564

.33

�2.

3661

.49

�0.

84A

rz11

.27

�0.

2736

.53

�2.

8412

.20

�0.

8925

.00

�1.

7760

.33

�1.

8861

.52

�0.

06S.

A.7

511

.09

�0.

3232

.23

�1.

7412

.42

�0.

6924

.50

�0.

8062

.00

�2.

1662

.18

�0.

99L

U-2

6S

12.5

1�

0.29

35.7

4�

1.60

11.6

8�

0.73

23.8

3�

0.78

66.1

7�

2.12

61.4

3�

0.76

Punj

ab-7

612

.79

�0.

4230

.66

�2.

4211

.27

�0.

4432

.83

�2.

7055

.50

�2.

5562

.02

�0.

92Pa

von

11.7

1�

0.34

43.1

3�

3.76

14.5

5�

0.85

29.5

0�

0.97

72.8

3�

2.59

61.9

2�

1.03

Wl

711

11.9

8�

0.38

37.9

2�

1.91

12.6

0�

0.39

24.1

7�

1.38

55.0

0�

2.39

61.9

5�

0.59

Bar

ani-

8312

.95

�0.

3138

.98

�1.

8313

.43

�0.

8525

.17

�0.

9275

.17

�2.

0662

.76

�1.

15


TAB

LE

2.C

ON

TIN

UE

D

Whe

atva

riet

ies

Cru

depr

otei

nW

etgl

uten

Dry

glut

enSD

SZ

elen

yva

lue

Wat

erab

sorp

tion

Che

nab-

7912

.55

�0.

4537

.33

�2.

4012

.10

�0.

4624

.00

�1.

1359

.00

�2.

3461

.82

�1.

29PB

-81

12.1

4�

0.49

31.3

3�

1.26

10.6

3�

0.63

23.1

7�

0.61

51.1

7�

2.54

62.2

0�

0.79

FSD

-83

12.4

7�

0.52

38.5

1�

1.71

12.9

4�

0.54

25.0

0�

1.45

58.0

0�

1.64

62.4

2�

0.73

Koh

inoo

r-83

11.0

4�

0.45

38.8

8�

2.59

13.0

2�

0.57

23.1

7�

1.43

63.6

7�

2.19

61.3

5�

0.60

Pak-

8112

.76

�0.

5037

.03

�2.

1912

.32

�0.

7926

.83

�1.

3164

.17

�1.

8061

.74

�0.

82FS

D-8

511

.71

�0.

5441

.12

�3.

3613

.98

�0.

5823

.83

�1.

8171

.33

�1.

6459

.78

�0.

57Pu

njab

-85

11.3

1�

0.56

35.2

1�

2.57

11.7

8�

0.52

25.1

7�

1.14

66.8

3�

2.43

59.8

1�

0.73

Wad

anak

-85

11.2

7�

0.55

21.2

0�

0.58

7.88

�0.

3219

.67

�1.

2452

.67

�2.

0462

.90

�0.

80C

hak-

8611

.91

�0.

7032

.57

�1.

7410

.81

�0.

8226

.17

�1.

5970

.50

�2.

2662

.18

�1.

08Sh

alim

ar-8

812

.18

�0.

3838

.17

�1.

2011

.30

�0.

7023

.00

�0.

7661

.34

�1.

7662

.05

�0.

95In

qlab

-91

10.6

5�

0.39

32.8

6�

1.15

10.7

8�

0.54

28.5

0�

1.53

67.3

3�

1.75

61.9

4�

0.79

Pasb

an-9

010

.88

�0.

4128

.52

�1.

2110

.08

�0.

2126

.00

�1.

6862

.17

�2.

1761

.47

�0.

44R

ohta

s-90

11.1

5�

0.51

34.8

6�

1.77

12.2

7�

0.56

31.1

7�

1.00

67.3

3�

1.92

61.3

3�

0.84

Perw

az-9

411

.68

�0.

4436

.90

�2.

3712

.81

�0.

3828

.50

�1.

9262

.67

�1.

9361

.70

�0.

59Pu

njab

-96

11.7

5�

0.66

38.3

6�

2.55

12.3

6�

0.50

23.8

3�

1.16

55.0

0�

2.05

61.3

7�

0.46

Shak

ar-9

511

.10

�0.

3133

.97

�1.

3213

.35

�1.

1827

.00

�0.

6354

.50

�1.

9960

.05

�0.

33D

urum

-97

12.4

8�

0.42

13.8

2�

0.40

4.46

5�

0.27

19.8

3�

0.89

55.0

0�

2.10

62.8

2�

0.95

Koh

ista

n-97

11.6

0�

0.28

29.7

2�

2.80

10.7

9�

0.58

23.1

7�

1.00

64.5

0�

2.09

62.9

7�

0.67

MH

-97

12.3

6�

0.46

30.6

1�

1.92

10.2

4�

0.56

24.1

7�

1.13

60.5

0�

1.36

61.8

7�

0.68

Che

nab-

2000

12.1

1�

0.36

38.5

8�

2.55

11.0

6�

0.39

24.6

7�

1.19

64.8

3�

1.68

61.0

1�

0.62

Uqa

b-20

0012

.24

�0.

6035

.21

�1.

7811

.72

�0.

7726

.17

�1.

2756

.83

�2.

1562

.53

�0.

66Iq

bal-

2000

12.7

5�

0.37

33.3

0�

2.22

11.1

0�

0.54

23.1

7�

1.90

55.5

1�

1.41

62.7

8�

0.65

Bak

har-

0211

.86

�0.

4426

.97

�1.

158.

99�

0.46

25.0

0�

0.93

50.6

7�

2.20

60.7

8�

0.45

G.A

.-02

12.0

6�

0.45

34.3

5�

3.15

12.6

0�

0.55

25.1

7�

0.85

80.3

4�

2.73

62.8

5�

0.63

Man

thar

-03

11.8

2�

0.39

33.1

9�

1.34

12.5

5�

0.74

21.8

3�

0.69

62.3

3�

1.50

60.6

3�

0.74

T-96

725

12.4

4�

0.35

6.09

�0.

002.

58�

0.00

18.8

3�

0.37

52.0

0�

1.72

59.6

4�

0.78

LSD

1.64

14.

233

2.09

02.

445

5.43

32.

051

SDS s

ed,s

odiu

mdo

decy

lsu

lfat

ese

dim

enta

tion

valu

e.

444 I. PASHA ET AL.

The SDS sedimentation volume ranged from 19.67 to 36 mL and found tobe highest in Pothohar and Sandal 73 while lowest in Wadanak 85 and Durum97 wheat varieties. Mean values for water absorption ranged from 59.78 to63.64 mL and found to be highest in wheat varieties SA 42 and C 271, whilethe lowest water absorption value was found in Faisalabad 85 and Punjab 85,having nonsignificant difference. T 96725 attained the lowest values for SDSsedimentation value and water absorption. Our findings are in line with theearlier findings of other researchers like Pedersen et al. (2004), Curic et al.(2001) and Konopka (2004), who reported the range of water absorption indifferent wheat varieties ranging from 51.5 to 59%, 53.33 to 71.00% and 57.8to 63.0%, respectively. Hydration of gluten proteins, i.e., the ability to absorbwater, is for practical purposes synonymous with protein swelling. The capac-ity of gluten proteins to swell in dilute acids has long been used as a test forflour quality determination. As the swelling value is a measure of the proteinquality, the protein content of the flour must also be taken into account inpredicting flour behavior as the protein level exerts an effect on the ultimateloaf volume (Rubenthaler and Pomeranz 1987).

When two crop years were pooled, the falling number ranged from 551.5to 893 s and found to be highest in wheat varieties Barani 83 and Manthar 03while lowest in Uqab 2000. Only one wheat variety, i.e., T 96725 (Triticale)exhibited a falling number (253.5 s) less than 400 s because high enzymaticactivity is a common defect of triticale grains (Varughese et al. 1996).Konopka (2004) reported falling numbers in 42 wheat flour samples rangingfrom 308 to 540 s. The falling number has an indirect relationship with thea-amylase activity; therefore, it may be concluded that falling number valuesfor wheat varieties that exceeded 400 s had very low or no a-amylase activity.Mailhot and Patton (1988) reported that all types of bread flour should havefalling number values in between 200 and 300 s. It has also been described inAACC (2000) that there is a very little a-amylase activity in wheat possessingfalling number values exceeding from 400 s, and there will be no use tocontinue the test beyond that point. a-Amylase activity may also be affectedsignificantly by locations and environment. The falling number was positivelycorrelated with water absorption (r = 0.7011**), moisture content(r = 0.3061**), ash content (r = 0.2280*), wet gluten (r = 0.2632**), drygluten (r = 0.4220**) and Zeleny value (r = 0.2343**) while negativelycorrelated with SDS sedimentation value (r = -0.2056*) (Table 3).

Gluten Content

The wet gluten content ranged from 13.82 to 43.13%, which was found tobe highest in Pavon and SA 42, while the lowest wet gluten was found inDurum 97 and Wadanak 85 wheat varieties, which are in line with the findings


TAB

LE

3.C

OR

RE

LA

TIO

NC

OE

FFIC

IEN

TS

OF

DIF

FER

EN

TQ

UA

LIT

YA

TT

RIB

UT

ES

OF

SPR

ING

WH

EA

TS

(n=

300)

WA

FNM

CC

PA

CW

GD

GZ

VSD

S

WA

1.00

00FN

0.70

11**

1.00

00M

C0.

3061

**0.

3061

**1.

0000

CP

-0.1

061N

S-0

.161

2NS

-0.1

441N

S1.

0000

AC

0.11

93N

S0.

2280

*0.

0189

NS

0.07

78N

S1.

0000

WG

0.16

11N

S0.

2632

**-0

.020

6NS

-0.0

840N

S-0

.132

7NS

1.00

00D

G0.

3417

**0.

4220

**-0

.039

3NS

-0.1

548N

S-0

.048

7NS

0.89

16**

1.00

00Z

V0.

3549

**0.

2343

**-0

.106

1NS

-0.1

857*

0.00

16N

S0.

4332

**0.

4868

**1.

0000

SDS

-0.1

907*

-0.2

056*

-0.2

113*

-0.0

943N

S-0

.014

2NS

0.28

48**

0.25

89**

0.71

86**

1.00

00

*In

dica

tes

P<

0.05

;**

indi

cate

sP

<0.

01.

NS,

nons

igni

fican

t;W

A,w

ater

abso

rptio

n;FN

,fal

ling

num

ber;

MC

,moi

stur

eco

nten

t;C

P,cr

ude

prot

ein;

AC

,ash

cont

ent;

WG

,wet

glut

en;D

G,d

rygl

uten

;Z

V,Z

elen

yva

lue;

SDS,

sodi

umdo

decy

lsu

lfat

ese

dim

enta

tion

valu

e.

446 I. PASHA ET AL.

of Miralbes (2003) and Paliwal and Singh (1985). Triticale (T 96725) attainedthe lowest wet and dry gluten values, i.e., 6.09 and 2.58%, respectively(Table 2). Wet gluten was positively correlated with falling number(r = 0.2632**), Zeleny value (r = 0.4332**) and SDS sedimentation value(r = 0.2848**) as presented in Table 3. According to Anjum and Walker(2000), the water content of wet gluten may differ because of the quality ofgluten. Dry gluten ranged from 4.46 to 14.55%, which was found to be highestin Pavon and Faisalabad 85, while the lowest dry gluten content was found inDurum 97 and Wadanak 85 wheat varieties. The present findings are in col-laboration with the previous studies conducted by Curic et al. (2001) whoreported the range of dry gluten from 8.44 to 11.77% in flours of differentwheat varieties, and Lin et al. (2003) found the range of dry gluten from 7.0to 16.7%. Dry gluten was positively correlated with water absorption(r = 0.3417**), falling number (r = 0.4220**), Zeleny value (r = 0.4868**)and SDS sedimentation value (r = 0.2589**). As dry gluten contains no water,it can be directly correlated with crude protein, which is a direct indicator offlour strength and bread-baking potentialities (Anjum and Walker 2000).

CONCLUSIONS

The wheat varieties differed significantly for gluten content and quality.The gluten content was found to be the highest in Pavon, SA 42 and Faisalabad85 while Zeleny value was higher in GA 02 and C 518 resulting in better glutenquality. The wheat varieties T 96725, Durum 97 and Wadanak 85 were lowestin all above said parameters. The wet and dry gluten were positively correlatedwith Zeleny value, water absorption and SDS sedimentation volume, indicat-ing the importance of gluten contents on the above said quality characteristicsof wheat. Hence, these must be considered as selection criteria in the breedingprograms for better gluten and ultimately, wheat quality.

REFERENCES

AHMAD, I. 2001. Varietal differences in amino acids, composition, millingand baking properties of spring wheats. PhD Thesis, Department of FoodTechnology, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan.

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CEREAL CHEMISTS (AACC). 2000.Approved Methods of the AACC, 10th Ed., The Association, St. Paul, MN.

ANJUM, F.M. and WALKER, C.E. 2000. Electrophoretic identification ofhard white spring wheats grown at different location in Pakistan indifferent years. J. Sci. Food Agric. 80, 1155–1161.


BUSHUK, W. 1985. Rheology: Theory and applications to wheat flour dough.In Rheology of Wheat Products (H. Faridi, ed.) pp. 1–26, AmericanAssociation of Cereal Chemists, St. Paul, MN.

BUSHUK, W., BRIGGS, K.J. and SHEBSKI, L.H. 1969. Protein quantity andquality as factor in the evaluation of bread weights. Can. J. Plant Sci.49(5), 113.

BUTT, M.S., ANJUM, F.M., DICK, J.V.Z. and MUMTAZ, S. 2001. Devel-opment of predictive models of end-use quality of spring wheats throughcanonical analysis. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 36, 433–440.

CURIC, D. 2001. Gluten as a standard of wheat flour quality. Food Technol.Biotechnol. 39(4), 353–361.

HOSENEY, R.C. 1986. Principles of Cereal Science and Technology,American Association of Cereal Chemists, St. Paul, MN.

HRUSKOVA, M. and FAMERA, O. 2003. Prediction of wheat and flourZeleny sedimentation value using NIR technique. Czech J. Food Sci. 21,91–96.

KENT, N.L. and EVERS, A.D. 1994. Technology of Cereals, 4th Ed.,Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK.

KONOPKA, I. 2004. Statistical evaluation of different technological and rheo-logical tests of polish wheat varieties for bread volume prediction. Int. J.Food Sci. Tech. 39, 11–20.

LIN, P., CHIANG, S.H. and CHANG, C.Y. 2003. Comparison of rheologicalproperties of dough prepared with different wheat flours. J. Food DrugAnal. 11(3), 220–225.

MAILHOT, W.C. and PATTON, J.C. 1988. Criteria of flour quality. In WheatChemistry and Technology (Y. Pomeranz, ed.) pp. 69–90, AmericanAssociation of Cereal Chemists, St. Paul, MN.

MENJIVAR, J. 1990. Fundamental aspects of dough rheology. In DoughRheology and Baked Product Texture (H. Faridi and J.M. Faubion, eds.)pp. 1–28, AVI Publishing, New York.

MIRALBES, C. 2003. Prediction chemical composition and alveographparameters on wheat by near-infrared transmittance spectroscopy.J. Agric. Food Chem. 51, 6335–6339.

PEDERSEN, L., KAACKA, K., BERGSØEB, M.N. and ADLER-NISSEN, J.2004. Rheological properties of biscuit dough from different cultivars andrelationship to baking characteristics. J. Cereal Sci. 39, 37–46.

POMERANZ, Y. and WILLIAMS, P.C. 1990. Wheat hardness: Itsgenetic, structural and biochemical background, measurement and sig-nificance. In Advances in Cereal Science and Technology, Vol. X (Y.Pomeranz, ed.) pp. 471–548, American Association of Cereal Chemists,St. Paul, MN.

448 I. PASHA ET AL.

RUBENTHALER, G.L. and POMERANZ, Y. 1987. NIR spectra of HRWwheats varying widely in protein content and bread making potential.Cereal Chem. 64, 407–11.

SCHOFIELD, J.D. 1994. Wheat proteins: Structure and functionality inmilling and bread-making. In Wheat: Production, Properties and Quality(W. Bushuk and V. Rasper, eds.) pp. 73–106, Blackie Academic andProfessional, Glasgow, UK.

SHEWRY, P.R. and TATHAM, A.S. 2000. Wheat, pp. 335–339, The RoyalSociety of Chemistry, Cambridge CB4 OWF, UK.

STEEL, R.G.D., TORRIE, J.H. and DICKEY, D. 1996. Principles and Pro-cedures of Statistics. A Biometrical Approach, 3rd Ed., McGraw HillBook Co. Inc., New York, NY.

SUBDA, H. 1991. Biochemical and technological characteristics of springwheat I. Protein content and quality. Hodowla Rosl. Aklim. Nasienn.35(3–4), 69–82.

VARUGHESE, G., PFEIFFER, W.H. and PENA, R.J. 1996. Triticale: A suc-cessful alternative crop (Part I). Cereal Food World 41, 474–482.

WEEGELS, P.L., HAMER, R.J. and SCHOFIELD, J.D. 1996. Functionalproperties of wheat glutenin. J. Cereal Sci. 23, 1–18.

WILLIAMS, P., EL-HARAMEIN, F.J., NAKKOUL, H. and RIHAWI, S.1986. Crop Quality Evaluation Methods and Guidelines, InternationalCenter for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA), Aleppo,Syria.


gluten quality prediction and correlation studies in spring wheats

Documents