Скачать презентацию Canadian Grain Commission canadienne des grains Durum Quality Скачать презентацию Canadian Grain Commission canadienne des grains Durum Quality

ed813bf5aea8fa46f4fced98ac1e5d68.ppt

  • Количество слайдов: 29

Canadian Grain Commission canadienne des grains Durum Quality Standards for Pasta Production Quality Analysis Canadian Grain Commission canadienne des grains Durum Quality Standards for Pasta Production Quality Analysis Methods B. A. Marchylo, Ph. D. Program Manager, Durum Wheat Research Canadian Grain Commission Grain Research Laboratory Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Durum Wheat Quality • Durum millers and pasta processors physical condition of wheat grain Durum Wheat Quality • Durum millers and pasta processors physical condition of wheat grain r wheat & semolina composition r intrinsic quality r • Priorities differ in different markets • Range of quality segregations needed

Measurement of Quality • Visual grain grading mostly subjective r efficient r cost effective Measurement of Quality • Visual grain grading mostly subjective r efficient r cost effective r – segregating large volumes into quality packages

Visual Grading • What does it tell us about quality? r visual appearance / Visual Grading • What does it tell us about quality? r visual appearance / physical quality – durum wheat milling, Ø primary quality selection criteria – influenced by environmental conditions r physical defects or damage factors – within tolerances for each grade

Visual Grading • In Canada r visual appearance / physical quality – connected to Visual Grading • In Canada r visual appearance / physical quality – connected to processing – quality by scientific research – grade tolerances set accordingly r appearance reflects end use quality

Specific Quality Factors • Durum wheat millers and processors increasing demand for more specific Specific Quality Factors • Durum wheat millers and processors increasing demand for more specific quality factors r want more than grade r • Can this demand be met ?

Methods For Quality Testing • What methods can be used to determine durum quality? Methods For Quality Testing • What methods can be used to determine durum quality? • Will these work in the commercial durum trade ? r from farm to the processor

Methods For Quality Testing • Objective measurements of quality r incorporate into grading systems? Methods For Quality Testing • Objective measurements of quality r incorporate into grading systems? • Limited by: r time constraints – grain segregation and handling – testing capabilities • Further incorporation of technology into grading is an inescapable change

Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Milling quality slow laboratory scale milling r no Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Milling quality slow laboratory scale milling r no rapid methods available r – test weight

Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Test Weight easy to use r predictive r Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Test Weight easy to use r predictive r

Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Falling Number relatively slow r hampers operational segregation Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Falling Number relatively slow r hampers operational segregation systems r

Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Protein Content r Near Infrared Reflectance (NIR) – Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Protein Content r Near Infrared Reflectance (NIR) – rapid technology – provides specified protein content

Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Hard vitreous kernel / starchy kernel content manual Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Hard vitreous kernel / starchy kernel content manual r tedious r subjective r slows high throughput grain terminals r

Objective Methods For Quality Testing • hard vitreous kernel r by machine vision – Objective Methods For Quality Testing • hard vitreous kernel r by machine vision – camera – computer objective, repeatable r fast, accurate r costly r

Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Ash content laboratory standard oven procedure r no Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Ash content laboratory standard oven procedure r no rapid instrumental procedures r durum wheat cannot be segregated according to this factor r

Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Colour r colour of wheat or semolina sample Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Colour r colour of wheat or semolina sample – “potential” pasta colour r alcohol extraction of yellow pigments – laboratory method

Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Variety r intrinsic quality package – wheat quality Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Variety r intrinsic quality package – wheat quality characteristics incorporated by plant breeders specified as part of contract r marketing tool r in Canada intrinsic quality of durum varieties strictly controlled r

Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Variety segregation r identity preserved – from the Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Variety segregation r identity preserved – from the field, – through the handling system – during loading – transit to the final processor r adds to cost of durum wheat

Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Variety segregation Verifying purity r monitoring for leakage Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Variety segregation Verifying purity r monitoring for leakage into other shipments r variety identification r – electrophoresis – HPLC – DNA (PCR) Protein Fingerprints

Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Variety identification methods r costly, slow laboratory methods Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Variety identification methods r costly, slow laboratory methods

Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Gluten strength characteristics SDS sedimentation test r gluten Objective Methods For Quality Testing • Gluten strength characteristics SDS sedimentation test r gluten index method r alveograph r – uses semolina • slow • laboratory methods

Summary • Segregating durum wheat into different quality packages r visual grading – cost Summary • Segregating durum wheat into different quality packages r visual grading – cost effective – efficient r NIR – provides protein segregation

Summary • Segregating durum wheat into different quality packages r quality factors other than Summary • Segregating durum wheat into different quality packages r quality factors other than protein – quality evaluation methods Ø laboratory-based Ø sometimes complex Ø generally too slow for segregation

Summary • Specific quality information r Analysis of cargoes after loading – possible Ø Summary • Specific quality information r Analysis of cargoes after loading – possible Ø analysis after vessel departure Ø after the fact – adds to cost of wheat • Related problem r methods lack consistency and reproducibility among laboratories

Summary • Development of rapid, objective, automated quality testing procedures to enhance or replace Summary • Development of rapid, objective, automated quality testing procedures to enhance or replace visual grading r to facilitate segregation r to give more specific quality information r to facilitate identity preservation r

Summary • Implementation of rapid, objective, automated quality testing procedures r challenges – to Summary • Implementation of rapid, objective, automated quality testing procedures r challenges – to apply operationally over a wide area – for large volumes r future – technology used at farm level

Summary • Rapid, objective, automated quality testing procedures r substantial cost of development and Summary • Rapid, objective, automated quality testing procedures r substantial cost of development and implementation – – farmer can’t cover costs passed on to Ø processors Ø ultimately consumer

Summary • Ultimate goal r more precise, wheat quality information for processors – variety, Summary • Ultimate goal r more precise, wheat quality information for processors – variety, milling performance, gluten characteristics, colour, etc.