Advertisement

Cereal Research Communications

, Volume 37, Issue 1, pp 83–92 | Cite as

Most Suitable Mixing Parameters for Use in Breeding Breadwheat for Processing Quality

  • A. Neacşu
  • G. Stanciu
  • N. N. SăulescuEmail author
Quality and Utilization

Abstract

Dough mixing properties are important in determining wheat processing and end-use quality. The Reomixer is a mixograph type device which provides mixing curves, described in detail by a total of 17 parameters. We analyzed the Reomixer mixing parameters of 26 breeding lines grown in 2007, in four contrasting environments (with and without Nitrogen fertilization, under water stress or irrigated). Using these data, we attempted to condense the information by identifying the most suitable parameters for use in a breeding program. We used the following criteria: high reproducibility (minimum coefficient of variation among repetitions), high genotype influence (i.e. high heritability), larger amount of information about overall variation of the other mixing parameters and complementarity of information (low correlation with other selected parameters). Mixing parameters varied widely for all criteria and no one parameter was best for all of them. Based on average performance we selected: “initial slope”, “peak time”, “peak height”, “end width” and “breakdown”, as having better ranking for the first three criteria and being less correlated between themselves than other mixing parameters. The five selected parameters cover all phases of dough development and describe all basic rheological aspects of mixing properties.

Keywords

wheat processing quality mixing parameters breeding 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, C. 2004. Characterising Wheat Flour Protein Quality from REOMIXER Traces. Hgca Project Report 324, Home-Grown Cereals Authority, London, 1–75.Google Scholar
  2. Bohlin, L. 2007. ReoMixer Online Software Operation Manual, Beta version 0.9, Sept. 2007.Google Scholar
  3. Chung, O.K., Ohm, J.B., Caley, M.S., Seabourn, B.W. 2001. Prediction of Baking Characteristics of Hard Winter Wheat Flours Using Computer-Analyzed Mixograph Parameters. Cereal Chemistry 78 (4):493–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Finney, K.F., Shogren, M.D. 1972. A ten-gram mixograph for determining and predicting functional properties of wheat flours. Baker’s Dig. 46 (2):32–35, 38–42, 77.Google Scholar
  5. Shewry, P.R., Halford, N.G., Belton, P.S., Tatham, A.S. 2002. The structure and properties of gluten: an elastic protein from wheat grain. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 357:133–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Tipples, K.H., Kilborn, R.H. 1974. Dough development for shorter breadmaking processes. Bakers Digest 48:34.Google Scholar
  7. Uthayakumaran, S., Gras, P.W., Stoddard, F.L., Bekes, F. 1999. Effect of Varying Protein Content and Glutenin-to-Gliadin Ratio on the Functional Properties of Wheat Dough. Cereal Chemistry 76 (3):389–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Wikstrőm, K., Bohlin, L. 2007. Reomixer TM — Wheat Dough Rheology and Baking Quality by Multivariate Analysis. http://www.reologen.se
  9. Wilkstrőm, K., Bohlin, L. 1996. Multivariate analysis as a tool to predict bread volume from mixogram parameters. Cereal Chemistry 73:686–690.Google Scholar
  10. Zhu, J., Khan, K. 2001. Effects of genotype and environment on glutenin polymers and breadmaking quality. Cereal Chemistry 78 (2):125–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Agricultural Research and Development Institute — Fundulea 1FunduleaRomania

Personalised recommendations