Characterisation of Grain Quality of Syrian Durum Wheat Genotypes Affecting Milling Performance and End-Use Quality
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Characterisation of grain quality of Syrian durum wheat genotypes affecting milling performance and end-use quality. JIHAD SAMAAN A thesis submitted to the University of Plymouth in ;partial fulfilment torthe·degree of 'DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY School of Biological Sciences Faculty of Science June 2007 i I /i ;/ . · Unlvers.ltv of Plymouth : ,Llbrary . LIBRARY s-TORE Abstract: Characterisation of grain quality of Syrian durum wheat genotypes affecting milling performance and end-use quality. Jihad Samaan Durum wheat is a strategic crop in Syria produced in high quantities and used mainly for the production of Arabic bread, bulgur and pasta. This investigation is the first known systematic study relating the grain quality of nine domestic cultivars to milling performance and pasta quality in order to map the Syrian durum wheat characteristics onto the world market requirements and hence determine the potential export development. Furthermore, it examines the influence of environment, genotype and their interaction on the physiochemical characteristics of five durum wheat cultivars grown in five different locations under rainfed and irrigated conditions in Syria. AACC standard methods were principally used in this investigation. Despite the soundness of grains revealed by elevated test weight (83.1-85.9 kghr\ 1000 kernel weight (42.50-55.0 g) and falling number (433-597 sec), it is necessary to improve the kernel quality of Syrian durum wheat for the degree of vitreousness and total protein content (average quality data were 65% and 12.6% respectively) for better end-use product quality. In addition, irrigation demonstrated a significant effect on kernel quality traits, for example, irrigated samples showed the highest test weights. The importance of three physiochemical markers, namely total protein content, the degree ofvitreousness and kernel hardness was substantiated and presented useful indicators for future development in Syrian durum wheat breeding programmes. Optimum cooking time of pasta and cooked pasta firmness correlated significantly with final viscosity (r = 0.51, 0.73), dough development time (r = 0.69 and 0.63) and R.nax (r = -0.64, -0.43) which indicated that RV A, farinograph and extensograph techniques were useful indicators of the cooking properties of pasta. Overall, this study revealed that to achieve the aim of improving the domestic production and expanding the potential export of durum wheat crop in Syria, both genetic and agronomic improvements are still required. I List of contents: Abstract: ............................................................................................................................ .I List of contents: ................................................................................................................ 11 List of tables: ................................................................................................................ VIII List of figures: ................................................................................................................. XI Acknowledgements: ..................................................................................................... XIII Courses attended: .......................................................................................................... XV Publications: .................................................................................................................. XV AUTHOR'S DECLARATION ..................................................................................... XVI 1. The current situation and future development of wheat in Syria: ......................... 1 2. Literature Review: .................................................................................................... 10 2.1. PHYSICAL PROPERTIES: ................................................................................. ll 2.1.1. Specific (test) weight: ................................................................................... 11 2.1.2. Kernel hardness: ............................................................................................ 13 2.1.3. The degree of vitreousness: ........................................................................... 16 2.2. CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS: .................................................................. 17 2.2.1. Ash content: .................................................................................................. 17 2.2.2. Lipids content: ............................................................................................... 18 2.2.3. Starch quality and quantity: ................................................................. ." ........ 18 2.2.4. Total protein content: .................................................................................... 22 2.2.5. Gluten content: .............................................................................................. 24 2.2.5. 1. Gliadin: .................................................................................................. 25 2.2.5. 1. Glutenin: ................................................................................................ 26 11 2.2.6. Gluten strength: ............................................................................................. 28 2.2.7. Amino acids: ................................................................................................. 30 2.3. THE MILLING TECHNOLOGY OF DURUM WHEAT: ................................. 30 2.4. PASTA QUALITY: ............................................................................................. 36 2.5. THE EFFECT OF ENVIRONMENT AND GENOTYPE ON WHEAT QUALITY: .................................................................................................................. 43 2.6. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE THESIS: ................................................... 47 3. Materials and Methods: ............................................................................................ 49 3.1. MATERIALS: ...................................................................................................... 49 3.1.1. Seeds Set-1: ................................................................................................... 49 3.1.2. Seed Set-2: .................................................................................................... 50 3.1.2.1. Seedsub-set-1: ....................................................................................... 50 3.1.2.2. Seed sub-set-2: ....................................................................................... 54 3.2. METHODS: ......................................................................................................... 56 3 .2.1. Physical characteristics: ................................................................................ 56 3.2.1.1. The degree ofvitreousness: .................................................................... 56 3.2.1.2. Test weight: ............................................................................................ 56 3.2.1.3. Thousand Kernel weight: ....................................................................... 57 3.2.1.4. Kernel hardness: .................................................................................... 57 3.2.1.5. Kernel size distribution: ......................................................................... 58 3.2.1.6. Single kernel characteristics: ................................................................. 58 3.2.1. 7. Scanning Electron Microscopy: ............................................................. 58 3 .2.2. Chemical characteristics: .............................................................................. 59 3.2.2.1. Moisture content: ................................................................................... 59 3.2.2.2. Ash content: ............................................................................................ 60 Ill 3.2.2.3. Falling number: ..................................................................................... 60 3.2.2.4. Protein content: ...................................................................................... 61 3.2.2.5. Gluten quality and quantity: .................................................................. 62 3.2.2.6. Starch content: ....................................................................................... 63 3.2.2. 7. Amylose content: .................................................................................... 64 3.2.2.8. Pasting properties ofwheat starch: ....................................................... 65 3. 2. 2. 9. Thermal properties ofwheat starch: ...................................................... 68 3.2.3. Semolina evaluation: ..................................................................................... 70 3.2.3.1. Semolina yield: ....................................................................................... 70 3.2.3.2. Semolina pf!rticle size distribution: ....................................................... 74 3.2.3.3. Speck count: ........................................................................................... 74 3.2.4. Dough rheological measurements: ................................................................ 15 3.2.4.1. Farinograph: .......................................................................................... 75 3.2.4.2. Extensograph: ........................................................................................ 77 3.2.4.3. Mixograph: