COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PHYSICAL, FUNCTIONAL, AND NUTRITIONAL PROPERTIES OF EMMER WHEAT (Triticum dicoccum) AND COMMON WHEAT (Triticum aestivum) SEMOLINA

H.V. SURYAWANSHI¹*, S.K. SADAWARTE², A. JOSHI³, I.T. NIKKAM^4
1Department of Food Process Technology, College of Food Technology, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani, 431402, Maharashtra, India
²Department of Food Process Technology, College of Food Technology, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani, 431402, Maharashtra, India
³Department of Food Process Technology, College of Food Technology, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani, 431402, Maharashtra, India
⁴Department of Food Process Technology, College of Food Technology, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani, 431402, Maharashtra, India
* Corresponding Author : himanshusurya87@gmail.com

Received : 06-09-2023     Accepted : 28-10-2023     Published : 30-10-2023
Volume : 15     Issue : 10       Pages : 12702 - 12708
Int J Agr Sci 15.10 (2023):12702-12708

Keywords : Emmer wheat, Common wheat¸ Functional properties, Nutritional, Cooking
Academic Editor : Pradip Kumar Saini
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Department of Food Process Technology, College of Food Technology, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani, 431402, Maharashtra, India
Author Contribution : All authors equally contributed

This study conducted a thorough comparative analysis of semolina derived from two wheat varieties, Emmer wheat (Triticum dicoccum) and Common wheat (Triticum aestivum). Emmer wheat exhibited distinctive physical traits, including a reddish-brown colour, smaller length (8.736mm), and a higher thousand kernel weight (35.3grams) compared to common wheat. Nutritional analysis indicated that emmer wheat had lower moisture content (10.13%), higher fat content (2.8%), significantly higher protein content (19.01%), lower gluten content (8.72%), and higher ash content (2.47%) compared to common wheat. Emmer wheat semolina displayed unique functional properties, with slightly lower water absorption capacity, higher oil absorption capacity, lower swelling capacity, and significantly higher solubility and water holding capacity. Emmer wheat semolina was darker in colour with increased redness and reduced yellowness compared to common wheat semolina. Cooking characteristics showed that emmer wheat semolina generally required longer cooking times and reached a saturation point at a 1:9 semolina-to-water ratio

1. Joshi A. K., Mishra B., Chatrath R., Ferrara G.O. and Singh R. P. (2007) Euphytica, 431-446.
2. Biradar S. S., Yashavanthakumar K. J., Navathe S., Reddy U. G., Baviskar V. S., Gopalareddy K., ... and Desai S. A. (2022) New Horizons in Wheat and Barley Research: Global Trends, Breeding and Quality Enhancement, 531-563.
3. Biel W., Jaroszewska A., Stankowski S., Sobolewska M. and Pacelik J. K. (2021) European Food Research and Technology, 247, 1525-1538.
4. Dhanavath S. and Rao U. J. S. P. (2017) Journal of Food Science, 82(10), 2243-2250.
5. Srivastava S., Sakhare S.D. and Indrani D. (2014) Journal of Texture Studies, 45(6), 452-461.
6. Gruber W. and Sarkar A. (2012) Durum Wheat: Chemistry and Technology, (2?? ed), 139-159.
7. Al-Mahasneh M. A. and Rababah T. M. (2007) Journal of Food Engineering, 79(4), 1467-1473.
8. Varnamkhasti M. G., Mobli H., Jafari A., Keyhani A. R., Soltanabadi M. H., Rafiee S. and Kheiralipour K. (2008) Journal of Cereal Science, 47(3), 496-501.
9. Sunil C. K., Venkatachalapathy N., Shanmugasundaram S., Pare A. and Loganathan M. (2016) International Journal of Science, Environment and Technology, 5(2), 632-637.
10. A.O.A.C. (2005) Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Gaithersburg, MD.
11. A.O.A.C. (1990) Official methods of analysis, Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.
12. AACC, Approved Methods of the American Association of Cereal Chemists, AACC, St. Paul, MN, USA, 10th ed. edition, 2000.
13. Kumar V., Sharma H. K. and Mishra S. (2017) Simulation of spray drying of tomato juice using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) Cogent Food and Agriculture, 3(1), 1-9.
14. Ige M. M., Ogunsua A.O. and Oke O. (1984) Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry, 32, 822-825.
15. Sosulski F. W., Garatt M.O. and Slinkard A. E. (1976) International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 9, 66-69.
16. Iyer L. and Singh U. (1997) Food Australia, 49, 27-31.
17. Poshadri A., Deshpande H. W., Machewad G. M., Kshirsagar R. B., Gadhe K. S., and Kadam S. D. (2023) Food and Humanity, 1, 1200-1205.
18. Annapurna K. (2000) Master’s thesis. University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, India.
19. Patekar S. D., More and Hashmi S. I. (2017) Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, 6(5), 600-604.
20. Marconi E. and Cubadda R. (2005) Emmer Wheat. In Abdel-Aal, E.S.M., Wood, P.J. (Eds.), American Association of Cereal Chemistry, Inc. pp-63-108.
21. Blanco A., Giorgi B., Perrino P. and Simeone R. (1990) Agricoltura Ricerca, 12, 41-58.
22. Cubadda R. and Marconi E. (1995) In Padolusi S., Hammer K., Heller J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Hulled Wheats (pp. 40-99). International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome: Italy.
23. Patil R. (1998) Master’s Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, India.
24. Aalami M., Rao U.P. and Leelavathi K. (2007) Food Chemistry, 102(4), 993-1005.
25. Chavan U. D., Patil S. S., Rao B.D. and Patil J. V. (2015) Indonesian Journal of Agricultural Science, 16(1), 1-20.
26. Girma A., Bultosa G. and Abera S. (2019) Journal of Food Science and Nutrition Therapy, 1(1), 001-006.
27. Boudalia S., Gueroui Y., Boumaza B., Bousbia A., Benada M., Leksir C., Mezroua E.Y., Zemmouchi K. R., Saoud A. and Chemmam M. (2020) Scientia agriculturae bohemica, 51(3), 75-85.
28. Wang K. and Fu B. X. (2020) Foods, 9(9), 1308.
29. Schopf M. and Scherf, K. A. (2021) Foods, 10(2), 228.
30. Barak S., Mudgil D. and Khatkar, B. S. (2014) International Journal of Food Properties, 17(7), 1428-1438.
31. Wieser H., Koehler P. and Scherf, K. A. (2023) Cereal Chemistry, 100(1), 36-55.
32. Gazmuri A. M. and Bouchon P. (2009) Food Chemistry, 115(3), 999-1005.
33. Ahmad S., Nema P. K. and Bashir, K. (2017) Drying Technology, 36(11), 1284-1291.
34. Ibrahim D. G. and Ani J. C. (2018) Agro-science, 17(2), 1-8.
35. Oladunmoye O. O., Aworh O. C., Maziya?Dixon B., Erukainure O. L. and Elemo G. N. (2014) Food Science & Nutrition, 2(2), 132-138.
36. Boucheham N., Galet L., Patry S. and Zidoune M. N. (2019) Food Science and Nutrition, 7(9), 3081-3092.
37. Oghbaei M. and Prakash J. (2016) Cogent Food & Agriculture, 2(1), 1136015.
38. Fuad T. and Prabhasakar P. (2011) Food and Bioprocess Technology, 5(5), 1743-1755.
39. Pérez E. and Pérez L. (2009) African Journal of Food Science, 3(11), 352-360.
40. Messia M. C., Cuomo F., Falasca L., Trivisonno M. C., De Arcangelis E. and Marconi E. (2021) Foods, 10(3), 589.
41. Sereti V., Lazaridou A., Biliaderis C. G. and Valamoti S. M. (2021) Foods, 10(4), 789.
42. Mohamed A. A. and Rayas-Duarte P. (2003) Food Chemistry, 81(4), 533-545.
43. Gazza L., Galassi E., Nocente F., Natale C. and Taddei F. (2022) Foods, 11(18), 2905.
44. Yamlahi A., Salghi R. and Ouhssine M. (2014) International Journal of Engineering Inventions, 4(2), 31-44.
45. Padalino L., Mastromatteo M., Lecce L., Spinelli S., Conte A. and Del Nobile M. A. (2015) International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition, 66(3), 266-274.