Paper · 2018 · Romanian Agricultural Research

Evaluation of Three Wheat Species (Triticum aestivum L., T. spelta L., T. dicoccum (Schrank) Schuebl) Commonly Used in Organic Cropping Systems, Considering Selected Parameters of Technological Quality

Vasyl Petrenko; Radosław Spychaj; Oleh Prysiazhniuk; et al.

6
claims
6
verbatim quotes
4
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

A recent interest in the usage of different wheat species for organically grown healthy food has led to resurgence in cultivation not only of hulled wheat, but also of coloured-grain wheat, which contains a large number of nutrients that have vital importance for human feed. The study was aimed to determine and compare the technological properties of Triticum spelta L., Triticum dicoccum (Schrank) Schuebl and colouredgrain wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). The research was based on field experiment carried out at the Agronomy experimental station of National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine (Kyiv region) during the period 2014-2016. The data were analyzed using ANOVA method. The difference of weather conditions among experimental years did not have significant influence on examined parameters. On the other hand quality parameters significantly depended on the wheat species. The results obtained indicated that the highest protein content was testified in emmer wheat 20.8 %, but the highest wet gluten yield (30.8 %) and as a result better rheological dough properties was determined in spelt wheat. Significantly the least values for such key parameters as flour strength (W), water absorption, sedimentation value were found examining T. aestivum (coloured). Overall it should be noted that all three examined wheat species had poor technological properties for bread producing in most characteristics, except protein content.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 6

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Emmer wheat had the highest protein content, 20.8%.

Taxon
emmer wheate1
Outcome
protein contente1
Direction
higheste1
Value
20.8 %e1

Verbatim

e1

“the highest protein content was testified in emmer wheat 20.8 %”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 943–1006 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Spelt wheat had the highest wet gluten yield, 30.8%.

Taxon
spelt wheate1
Outcome
wet gluten yielde1
Direction
higheste1
Value
30.8 %e1

Verbatim

e1

“but the highest wet gluten yield (30.8 %) and as a result better rheological dough properties was determined in spelt wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1008–1131 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Spelt wheat had better rheological dough properties.

Taxon
spelt wheate1
Outcome
rheological dough propertiese1
Direction
bettere1

Verbatim

e1

“but the highest wet gluten yield (30.8 %) and as a result better rheological dough properties was determined in spelt wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1008–1131 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Coloured-grain Triticum aestivum had significantly the lowest flour strength, water absorption and sedimentation value.

Taxon
T. aestivum (coloured)Triticum aestivume1
Outcome
flour strength (W), water absorption, sedimentation valuee1
Direction
least valuese1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Significantly the least values for such key parameters as flour strength (W), water absorption, sedimentation value were found examining T. aestivum (coloured)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1133–1292 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Differences in weather conditions among experimental years had no significant influence on the examined quality parameters.

Treatment
difference of weather conditions among experimental yearse1
Outcome
examined parameterse1

Not reportedTaxonComparatorDirection

Verbatim

e1

“The difference of weather conditions among experimental years did not have significant influence on examined parameters”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 704–823 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All three wheat species had poor technological properties for bread making in most characteristics, except protein content.

Taxon
wheat speciesTriticum aestivume1
Outcome
technological properties for bread producinge1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“all three examined wheat species had poor technological properties for bread producing in most characteristics, except protein content”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1326–1460 · show in text ↑