Cited by 12Food composition and propertiesWheat and Barley Genetics and PathologyProteins in Food Systems

Effect of grain hardness, fractionation and cultivars on protein, pasting and dough rheological properties of different wheat flours

Singh, Narpinder, Katyal, Mehak, Virdi, Amardeep Singh, Kaur, Amritpal, Goyal, Annu, Ahlawat, Arvind Kumar, Mahendru Singh, Anju·2018·International Journal of Food Science & Technology

Abstract

Summary: Coarse flour fractions (CFF s) and fine flour fractions (FFF s) obtained from flour milled from twelve different wheat cultivars varying in grain hardness index (GHI) were evaluated for particle size distribution, pasting and protein characteristics. Cultivars with greater hardness produce flour with high protein content had more proportion of large size particles. FFF had higher unextractable polymeric protein, solvent retention capacity (SRC), sedimentation value (SV) and dough stability (DS) than their corresponding CFF. Both FFF and CFF from cultivars with lower hardness showed lower sodium SRC. CFF showed higher pasting viscosities than their corresponding FFF, and difference in these properties was greater amongst soft cultivars. DS increased with decrease in grain hardness, but medium hard cultivars showed exceptionally higher value. The concentration of HMW‐GS in the CFF was higher than FFF of hard wheat cultivars, whereas the concentration of LMW‐GS in the CFF and FFF was not influenced by the fractionation of flour.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ijfs.13794

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Singh, N., Katyal, M., Virdi, A. S., Kaur, A., Goyal, A., Ahlawat, A. K., & Mahendru Singh, A.
Affiliations
  • Guru Nanak Dev University (IN)
  • Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IN)
  • Division of Genetics Indian Agricultural Research Institute New Delhi 110012 India
Corresponding author
Singh, Narpinder
Venue
International Journal of Food Science & Technology
Published
2018-05-31
Volume
53
Issue
9
Pages
2077-2087
ISSN
  • 0950-5423 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2621
OpenAlex
W2805355273
Cited by
12
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
FWCI
1.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Journal of Food Science & Technology (publishedVersion)
Funders
University Grants Commission
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Food composition and properties
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Wheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Proteins in Food Systems
Keywords
wheat flour, wheat cultivars, dough rheology, pasting properties, protein content, particle size distribution, solvent retention capacity, sedimentation value, dough stability, high molecular weight glutenin subunits, low molecular weight glutenin subunits, unextractable polymeric protein

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review