Post on 23-May-2020
STUDY ON PUFFING AND FLAKING
CHARACTERISTICS OF SOME POTENTIAL PADDY
VARIETIES OF CHHATISGARH
M. Tech. (Agril. Engg.) Thesis
by
Lalit Kumar
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING AND
FOOD ENGINEERING
SWAMI VIVEKANAND COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL
ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY AND RESEARCH
STATION
FACULTY OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING
INDIRA GANDHI KRISHI VISHWAVIDYALAYA RAIPUR
(Chhattisgarh)
2017
STUDY ON PUFFING AND FLAKING
CHARACTERISTICS OF SOME POTENTIAL PADDY
VARIETIES OF CHHATISGARH
Thesis
Submitted to the
Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur
by
Lalit Kumar
IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE DEGREE OF
Master of Technology
in
Agricultural Engineering
(Agricultural Processing and Food Engineering)
Roll No. 220114002 ID No. 20141520460
JANUARY, 2017
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
It is by the blessings of the almighty, that I have able to complete my present studies
successfully and the piece of work for which I am eternally indebted
It gives me immense pleasure to express my profound sense of gratitude and respect to
my Major Advisor and Chairman of the Advisory Committee Er. N.K. Mishra, scientist, AICRP
on .Post Harvest Technology, Agricultural Processing and Food Engineering, Swami
Vivekananda College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology and Research Station,Faculty
of Agricultural Engineering, IGKV, Raipur, for his constructive criticism, learned counsel,
meticulous guidance, encouragement in planning and execution of research work and
affectionate treatment during the course of investigation, writing and presentation of thesis.
I am highly indebted to the member of advisory committee Dr. S. Patel, Professor and
Head of Department, Agricultural Processing and Food Engineering, Swami Vivekananda
College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology and Research Station, Faculty of
Agricultural Engineering, IGKV, Raipur, for his untiring help, valuable suggestions and timely
moral support, which enabled me to accomplish this task.
I am greatly indebted to other members of my advisory committee, Dr. R. R. Saxena,
Professor, Department of Agricultural Statistics, Dr. S. Bhandarkar, Professor, Department of
Genetics and Plant Breeding, Dr. A.K. Geda, Department of Plant Physiology, Agril.
Biochemistry, Medicinal & Aromatic Plants, College of Agriculture IGKV, Raipur for their
continuous advice, guidance and encouragement throughout the course of investigations.
I wish to express my deep sense of gratitude to Dean, Swami Vivekananda College of
Agricultural Engineering and Technology and Research Station, Faculty of Agricultural
Engineering, IGKV, Raipur, for providing necessary facilities and help regarding the research
work.
I like to express my sincere thanks to Dr. A. K. Dave, Head of Department of Farm
Machinery and Power and Dr. M. P. Tripathi, Head of Department of Soil Water Engineering
and for their kind support and help at various stages of the study.
My heartiest thanks to Dr. D. Khokhar, Er. P.S. Pisalkar, Er. A. Kalne Assistant
Professor (APFE), and all staff of Department of Agricultural Processing and Food
Engineering, for their benign help, valuable suggestions during planning of experiment and
critical appraisal of this manuscript.
I am also thankful to faculty members, Dr. B. P. Mishra, Dr. V. P. Verma, Er. A. P.
Mukharjee, Er. Md. Quasim, Dr. R.K. Nayak, Dr. S.V. Jogdand, Dr. V. M. Victor, Dr.
Jitendra Sinha,. Er. P. Katre, Er. D. Khalkho, for their timely co-operation during the course of
study.
I am thankful to all the technical and clerical staff members and other staff members
SVCAET & RS, Faculty of Agricultural Engineering for their kind support and help during
entire study.
I am deeply obligate and grateful to Head R.H. Richharia Research Laboratory, Head
Department of Plant Physiology Laboratory, and all staff of these laboratories for their timely
help and co-operate during experiments work.
I am very thankful to Shri Yuvraj Dahare, Mr. Deepak Parganiha, Mr. Geetesh Sinha,
Mr. Ajeet kumar, and Mr. Ashish , who helped me during the experiments work.
I avail this pleasant opportunity to express my sincere thanks to my class mates Anita,
Shashikant, Yograj, Gopikant, Pravin Nishad, Rajkumari, Pooja, Aditya, Surjeet, Prashant,
Rakshyap, Dhriti, Rakesh, Ravi, JKomra and my beloved seniors Nikhil Patre, Omprakash
Taram, Vikram Netam, Bhagwat Kumar, Jaspal Singh, Raghawendra Sachan and all my
juniors for their love, contribution and timely help during course of study. I also express special
thanks to all those who helped directly or indirectly during this study.
I have no words to express my hearty gratitude to my beloved parents, Father Mr.
Sewak Ram Ojha and Mother Mrs. Kumari Bai, my Brothers Mr. Rakesh Ojha, Mr. Tamraj
Ojha and my other family members, whose affection, environment, love and blessings have been
a beacon of light for the successful completion of this achievement.
Above all, my humble and whole heartily prostration to the almighty for their blessings
Place: Raipur (Lalit Kumar) Date:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Title Page No.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT i
TABLE OF CONTENTS iii
LIST OF TABLES vii
LIST OF FIGURES viii
LIST OF NOTATIONS/SYMBOLS x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xii
ABSTRACT (English) xiii
ABSTRACT (Hindi) xv
I INTRODUCTION 1
II REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Some physical grain characteristics of paddy/milled rice
2.2 Parboiling
2.3 Milling Characteristics of paddy
2.4 Physicochemical Properties of paddy/milled rice
2.5 Functional properties
2.6 Puffing/popping characteristics of parboiled milled rice
2.7 Flaking characteristics of cereals
III MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1 Experimental Site
3.2 Geographical Situation
3.3 Climatic Condition
3.4 Raw material procurement
3.5 Physical methods
3.5.1 Moisture content
3.5.2 Thousand grain mass
3.5.3 Dimensions
3.5.4 Sphericity
3.5.5 Geometric mean diameter
3.5.6 Surface area
3.5.7 Aspect ratio
3.5.8 Bulk density
3.5.9 True density
3.5.10 Angle of repose
3.5.11 Coefficient of static friction
3.5.12 Milling characteristics
3.5.12.1 Hulling percentage
3.5.12.2 Milling percentage
3.6 Preparation of thick size and thin size flaked rice
3.7 Method of preparing flaked rice
3.8 Physical and Functional properties of flaked rice
3.3.1 Recovery of flaked rice
3.8.2 Bulk density
3.8.3 True density
3.8.4 Water absorption index and water solubility index
3.8.5 Swelling power
3.8.6 Water uptake
3.9 Standardization of puffed rice
3.9.1 Preparation of parboiled milled rice
3.9.2 Puffed Rice by using a Continuous Fluidized Bed
Rice Puffing Machine
3.9.3 Method for preparing puffed rice
3.10 Pre treatments for puffed rice
3.10.1 Conditioning and preheating of parboiled milled
rice
3.11 Physical properties of puffed rice
3.11.1 Bulk Density
3.11.2 Puffing Yield
3.11.3 Volume expansion ratio
3.11.4 Length expansion and width expansion
3.12 Chemical methods
3.12.1 Moisture content
3.12.2 Protein content
3.12.3 Fat content
3.12.4 Ash content
3.12.5 Starch content
3.12.5.1 Principle
3.12.5.2 Procedure
3.12.5.3 Calculation
3.12.6 Amylose content
3.12.6.1 Principle
3.12.6.2 Procedure
3.12.6.3 Calculation
3.12.7 Amylopectin content
3.12.8 Gel Consistency
3.12.9 Gelatinization temperature or alkali dispersion
test
3.13 Sensory evaluation
3.14 Statistical analysis
IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Popularly Methods used for Producing Puffed Rice and
Flaked Rice Processing in the Chhattisgarh State
4.1.1 Traditional method – rice puffing by hot sand
roasting method
4.1.2 Commercial method – rice puffing by hot sand
roasting method
4.1.3 Traditional method - rice flaking by using Dhenki
unit
4.1.4 Commercial method - rice flaking by using edge
runner machine
4.2 Physical properties of paddy
4.2.1 Moisture content
4.2.2 Length, width and thickness
4.2.3 Geometric mean diameter
4.2.4 Sphericity
4.2.5 Aspect ratio
4.2.6 Surface area
4.2.7 Bulk density and true density
4.2.8 Angle of repose
4.2.9 Coefficient of friction
4.3 Milling characteristics
4.3.1 Hulling and milling percentage
4.4 Chemical properties of rice
4.4.1 Alkali Spreading Value and Gel Consistency
4.4.2 Starch, amylose and amylopectin
4.5 Physical, functional and nutritional properties of flaked rice
4.5.1 Moisture content
4.5.2 Flaking yield
4.5.3 Physical properties of flaked rice
4.5.4 Functional properties of flaked rice
4.5.5 Effect of varietal differences on proximate
analysis of rice and flaked rice
4.6 Puffing and nutritional properties of puffed rice
4.6.1 Moisture content
4.6.2 Puffing characteristics of parboiled milled rice
4.6.2.1 Expansion properties of rice
varieties
4.6.2.2 Bulk density of puffed rice
4.6.2.3 Puffing yield of varieties
4.6.3 Proximate analysis of rice varieties and puffed
rice
4.7 Sensory evaluation of puffed rice and flaked rice
V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
5.1 Conclusions
5.2 Suggestion for future work
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
Appendix-A
Appendix-B
Appendix-C
Appendix-D
RESUME
LIST OF TABLES
Table Title Page
No.
3.1 Treatments for standardization of puffing temperature for puffed rice
3.2 Classification of gel consistency
3.3 Spreading values on 7 point scale
4.1 Some physical properties of different paddy varieties
4.2 Static coefficients of friction of different paddy varieties on different
surfaces
4.3 Hulling and milling percentage
4.4 Alkali Spreading Value and Gel Consistency of rice
4.5 Chemical parameters of rice varieties
4.6 Moisture content of paddy varieties while processing into flaked rice
4.7 Recovery of flaked rice after processing
4.8 Physical properties of flaked rice of different varieties
4.9 Functional properties of different varieties of flaked rice
4.10 Individual CRD analysis for proximate composition of rice and
flaked rice
4.11 Moisture content of the paddy varieties while processing into
parboiled samples
4.12 Effect of varietal difference on puffing characteristics with different
puffing temperature
4.13 Factorial CRD analysis for varietal difference on puffing
characteristics with different puffing temperature
4.14 Bulk density of puffed rice at different puffing temperature
4.15 Puffing yield of rice varieties at different puffing temperature
4.16 Effect of varietal differences with different puffing temperature on
proximate analysis of rice and puffed rice
4.17 Individual CRD analysis for proximate composition of rice and
puffed rice
4.18 Effect of varietal difference on sensory quality of puffed rice
4.19 ANOVA for varietal difference on sensory quality of puffed rice
4.20 Effect of varietal difference on sensory quality of flaked rice
4.21 ANOVA for varietal difference on sensory quality of puffed rice
LIST OF FIGURES
Figu
re Title
Page
No.
3.1 Measurement of moisture contene by Hot air oven
3.2 Satake rubber rolls sheller for dehusking
3.3 Satake whitener for polishing of rice
3.4 Process flow chart for the development of the different size flaked rice
3.5 Draining of soaked water
3.6 Soaked paddy in buckets
3.7 Roasting unit
3.8 Edge runner machine
3.9 Cleaning unit
3.10 Flaked rice
3.11 Water bath for rice flour sample
3.12 Process flow chart for preparation of puffed rice
3.13 Salt treated parboiled rice
3.14 Pre- heating of rice
3.15 Continuous fluidized bed rice puffing machine
3.16 Puffed rice in bucket
3.17 Fat content determination in socs plus unit
3.18 Standard graph of glucose solution using anthrone reagent
3.19 Standard graph of amylose solution using anthrone reagent
4.1 Rice puffing by hot sand roasting-traditional method
4.2 Rice samples exposed to hot sand and separations of puffed rice by sieve
4.3 Rice puffing by hot sand roasting method- commercial method
4.4 Elevating parboiled rice
4.5 Screw conveying of rice
4.6 Addition salt solution
4.7 Roasting for puffing
4.8 Dhenki unit for making flaked rice by traditional method
4.9 Rice flaking by edge runner machine- commercial method
4.10 Roasting of soaked paddy
4.11 Heated paddy at edge runner
4.12 Cleaned flaked rice
4.13 Packaging of flaked rice
4.14 Effect of moisture content on hulling and milling
4.15 Starch, amylose and amylopectin content of rice varieties
4.16 Moisture Content during processing of flaked rice
4.17 Flaking yield of varieties
4.18 Moisture content while processing of parboiled rice
4.19 Effect of temperature on bulk density of varieties
4.20 Puffed rice of Barhasal at 2700C, 290
0C and 310
0C
4.21 Puffed rice of IGKV R2 at 2700C, 290
0C and 310
0C
4.22 Puffed rice of Mahamaya at 2700C, 290
0C and 310
0C
4.23 Effect of varietal difference on sensory quality of puffed rice
4.24 Effect of varietal difference on sensory quality of flaked rice
LIST OF NOTATIONS / SYMBOLS
Symbol Description
% Per cent
˂ Less than
˃ More than
× Multiple
α Angel of tilt
ϕ Degree of sphericity
θ Angle of repose
µ Coefficient of static friction
µL Micro liter
⁰C Degree Celsius
cm Centimeter
D Diameter
Da Arithmetic mean diameter
Dg Geometric mean diameter
etc. etcetera
g gram
g/ml Gram per milliliter
H Height
Ha Weight of rice after hulling
Hb Weight of paddy before hulling
h hour
i.e. That is
kg kilogram
L Length
Lf Final length
Li Initial length
m meter
mm milli meter
min. minute
ml Milli liter
mg milli gram
Ma Total weight of rice after milling
Mb Total weight of rice before milling
rpm revolution per minute
Sg Surface area
T Thickness
W Width
Wws Weight of wet sediment
Wf Weight of rice flour
Wds Weight of dry solids
Wf Width of puffed rice samples
Wi Width of unpuffed rice samples
W1 Initial weight of wet material sample
W2 Final weight of dried sample
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Agri. Agriculture
Agril Agricultural
AICRP All India Coordinated Research Project
AOAC Association of Official Agricultural Chemist
ANOVA Analysis of Variance
BD Bulk density
BER Breadth expansion ratio
BRP Broken rice percentage
C.G. Chhattisgarh
CV Coefficient of Variance
et al. et alibi
etc. etcetera
FAE Faculty of Agricultural Engineering
Fig. Figure
ICAR Indian Council of Agricultural Research
IGKV Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya
hp Horse power
HP Hulling percentage
HRP Head rice percentage
HTST High temperature short time
LER Length expansion ratio
MC Moisture content
MP Milling percentage
M. Tech Master of Technology
PHET Post-Harvest Engineering and Technology
Ra Aspect ratio
SD Standard Deviation
SP Swelling power
TD True density
Temp. Temparature
VER Volume expansion ratio
WAI Water absorption index
wb Wet basis
WSI Water solubility index
WU Water uptake
observed that from 73.37 to 76.23 % and 20.18 % (intermediate amylose content) to
25.30 % (high amylose content).
Paddy samples were soaked in water at room temperature overnight
followed by draining and roasting in an industrial roaster, tempered (10 min) and
flaked in edge runner machine. Moisture content reduced from about 30.85 to 34.16
% (wb) in paddy and 6.74 to 7.12 % (wb) after flaking in all the three varieties. Two
different types of flaked products were prepared thick and thin. The major
dimensions of thick and thin size flaked rice were found to be 8.01 to 8.67 mm and
9.80 to 12.27 mm for length and similarly 2.58 to 3.20 mm and 3.79 to 4.32 mm for
width and 0.71 to 1.32 mm and 0.43 to 0.77 mm for thickness, respectively.
Significant difference was observed in chemical properties of flaked rice. Protein
content was slightly high in thick size as compared to thin size flaked rice. The
recovery of flaked rice was recorded as 64.10, 64.60 and 60.50% for Barhasal,
Mahamaya and IGKV R2, respectively. The results of the sensory evaluation of
flaked rice indicated that the quality of flaked rice made from Barhasal was the best
among the three followed by IGKV R2 and Mahamaya. It is worth mentioning here
though the flaking percentage is highest in Mahamaya but the acceptability is best
in case of Barahasal.
Puffed rice, prepared from pre-gelatinized milled rice by continuous
fluidized bed puffing machine was done from the above three varieties. The effect
of varietal differences on puffing quality parameters expansion properties, puffing
yield were determined at different puffing temperature. Expansion characteristics
showed that the varieties suitable for production of puffed rice were Mahamaya and
IGKV R2 and followed by Barhasal at 310 0C puffing temperature. Nutritional
analysis showed following ranges of nutrient content in between puffed rice at
different puffing temperature: protein, 6.03 – 8.47 %, fat, 0.77 to 0.98 %, total ash,
3.15 – 4.65 %, it was observed that minimum protein content were in Mahamaya
and IGKV R2 which had a good expansion properties. The puffing yield was
recorded as 79.56, 78.42 and 74.43 % for Mahamaya, IGKV R2 and Barhasal at
310 0C puffing temperature respectively. The results of the sensory evaluation of
puffed rice indicated that the quality of puffed rice made from IGKV R2 was the
best among the three followed by Mahamaya and Barhasal.
”
”
”
”
” ” ”
” ”
CHAPTER-I
INTRODUCTION
Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is the staple food of the Indian population, consumed
mainly in the form of whole grains. Rice has a great diversity in its genetic
background, amylose content, grain shape, and cooking quality. Varietal properties
such as grain size, shape, thousand-kernel weight, hardness and bulk density affect
the grain quality. The cooking quality of rice is dependent to a large extent on the
properties of starch, mainly amylose content (Juliano, 1985). Paddy production in
the world is 734.9 million tonnes, out of which India produces around 157.8 million
tonnes (FAO 2012). About 10% of production is being utilized for the production of
rice products like popped, expanded and flaked rice in the country (Narasimha,
1995). It is rich in carbohydrates, contributes with about 60 to 70 % of the energy
needs, not only as a staple food but also as convenience food such as breakfast
cereals, multigrain flakes, puffed, popped, and extruded products; its pregelatinized
and puffed flour has been using as ingredients for cakes, desserts, and sweets,
formulated baby foods, soups, stews, crackers, noodles, puddings, bread, fermented
foods like idli, dosai, dhokla, rice vinegar, wine etc. Moreover, rice starch has been
used as a thickener and is the raw material for the production of rice maltodextrins
and syrups.
The most popular snacks in India, puffed rice which is prepared from
pregelatinized milled rice, and flaked rice which is prepared from paddy involves
soaking, roasting and flaking etc. requires a proper selection of paddy variety for
the best puffing quality and flaking characteristics. Hence three paddy varieties,
namely Mahamaya, IGKV R2 (Durgeshwari), and Barhasal are taking for research
and based on their chemical composition, physical characteristics, sensory
evaluation, and functional properties such as starch, amylose, amylopectin, gel
consistency, gelatinization temperature, length, width, thickness, true density, bulk
density, expansion ratio, expansion volume, puffing yield, flaking yield etc. Some
of the high yielding varieties have poor milling characteristics, due to which there is
a threat to disappearing of many traditional verities, which may be suitable for
the production of value added products like puffed and flaked rice having good
marketability potential. Numerous varieties of paddy are grown in the different
parts of the state comprising of bold, long, cylinder, fine, and scented etc. Of these,
many varieties are best suited for raw milling whereas many are suitable for
parboiling to produce rice for table purpose with direct cooking. On the other hand,
many of the varieties are better suited for the production of rice value added
products such as flaked rice (Poha or Chiwada), puffed rice (Muri or Murra or
Murmura).
To change the rice grain from compact to expanded structure, it has to pass
through many stages, which alters the physical properties and nutritional profile of
the rice grain due to thermal process during the puffing treatments. Rice parboiling
is a hydrothermal process, which modifies the qualitative and processing behavior
of rice (Dutta & Mahanta, 2012). The effect of parboiling conditions remains to be
fully understood. Three broad types of parboiling processes can be distinguished
(Bhattacharya 2004). One is conventional parboiling, where paddy is soaked to
saturation (about 30% moisture) and then steamed to gelatinise the starch. A second
has been termed pressure parboiling, but is better called low-moisture (LM)
parboiling, where paddy is only partially hydrated (12-22% moisture) but is then
gelatinised by steaming under elevated pressure. The third is dry-heat (DH)
parboiling, where fully soaked paddy is conduction heated with or without hot sand.
Within each type, again, the actual process parameters can be varied, resulting in
product-quality variation.
Rice grain is principally composed of starch granules with very small size
(about 2-5 μm). Starch is the natural source of energy in plants and is primarily
composed of two molecular fractions: amylose and amylopectin. During the
parboiling process starch granules are gelatinised and retrograded; as a result,
various changes occur in rice, which affects its quality parameters. The parboiling
treatment principally brings the characteristic change in rice grain, which leads to
expansion during puffing. On puffing, appreciable physical, conformational,
structural and crystallinity changes occur in rice grain due to the order-disorder
transitions, which takes place at the molecular level, leading to the change in the
morphology and texture of rice grain (Shih, King, Daigle, An, & Ali, 2007).
Puffed rice is a whole-grain puffed product from pregelatinized milled rice,
generally prepared by preconditioning the grain by hydrothermal treatment,
followed by drying and milling. The milled grains are again, saltwater treated to an
optimum moisture content, which is then subjected to puffing by the sand roasting
method or by frying in oil. It is commonly used in snacks, cereal drinks, ready-to-
eat breakfast cereal, and infant food. Not only is puffed rice a staple in the diet as a
major source of carbohydrate, but also it contributes beneficial nutrients including
dietary fiber, vitamins, minerals, and phytochemicals which have been linked to
reducing disease risk (FDA 2006; Maisont and Narkrugsa 2009). During puffing,
rice kernels increase their volume several times and a fully heat-treated crisp,
porous, ready-to-eat product is created. Regardless of the puffing process, two
important parameters should be taken into account: the selection of an appropriate
sort of rice, and the use of a proper hydro-heat treatment of raw rice. The quality of
puffed rice measured by puffing expansion and puffed yield was affected by the
maturity and variety of rice, puffing procedure, chemical and physical properties.
Srinivas and Desikachar (1973) found that good puffing paddy rice varieties
showed a weak point with a thin aleurone layer. It is mainly appreciated for its
crispness, lightness, and qualities related to its cellular structures (Hoke et al. 2005).
Flaked rice is a very popular rice product in many Asian and rice-consuming
countries. Over 85% of flaked rice in India (ca. 2.5 million tonnes) is produced in
the traditional production units (100 to 150 kg/d in batches of 1-2 kg each) called
edge runner system (Rajni Mujoo and S. Zakiuddin Ali, 1997). This product is
consumed as a snack after roasting, frying or spicing or soaking in water and
seasoning with spices and vegetables as an item of breakfast (Arya, 1990).
Essentially the process consists of soaking paddy in warm/hot water, draining,
roasting with sand in a shallow iron pan (Bhatti) over a strong fire followed by
flattening in an edge runner to obtain the desired thickness (Anantachar et al.,
1982). Average yield of rice flakes was about 70%, which is 6-7% higher than
obtained by the traditional process (Narasimha, et al., 1982). Flaked rice is obtained
after processing of paddy and its further processing yields flaked rice of very low
thickness with relatively lower weight and whiter colour than normal flaked rice.
Flaked rice is a rich source of carbohydrates, protein, vitamin, minerals,
phytochemicals, and essential amino acids with exception to lysine (Bhattacharya,
2011 and Maisont and Narkrugsa, 2009). The phytochemical content of flaked rice
viz. c-oryzanol has many health benefits as it lowers down the total blood
cholesterol and decreases the risk of heart disease (Berger et al., 2005). Flaked rice
generally consumed as breakfast item, snacks and savory is specific to particular
regions in India (Kumar and Prasad, 2013)
Puffing methods can be accomplished by using dry heat such as sand
roasting, roasting using salt, gun puffing, hot oil frying, using a heating medium
such as hot air or microwave radiation (Jaybhaye et al., 2014). Flaking methods, at
the household level, flaked rice is traditionally produced by hand pounding the
soaked and roasted paddy using a pestle and mortar. At the cottage level and larger
processing units, roasted paddy is collected in bamboo baskets and fed into an edge
runner. In some places flaked rice obtained from the edge runner is again pressed
and flattened in roller flakers to reduce further the thickness.
The processing of puffing and flaking rice from paddy is traditionally takes
about 4-6 days. Some of the tasks, particularly soaking of paddy, manual roasting of
paddy, mixing the ingredients with milled rice and stirring the rice in roaster pan for
uniform heating are highly labor intensive operations. Complete mechanization of
the process has not yet been undertaken. Many of the rice puffing and flaking units
are of the traditional type and are inefficient. Modern rice puffing and flaking
machines are having high capacity and are capital intensive, although efficient. In
order to understand the rice puffing and flaking technology and to know how the
different parameters influencing the puffed and flaked rice making process, the
present objectives on the puffing and flaking characteristics of selected varieties of
paddy.
1. To study about processing methods popularly used for producing puffed and
flaked rice.
2. To study the puffing and flaking characteristics of selected varieties of
paddy.
3. To standardization the processing parameters for the puffing and flaking of
rice.
CHAPTER-II
REVIEW OF LITERATURES
The available literature regarding the various aspect of present study has
been given under following heads:
1. Some physical grain characteristics of paddy/milled rice
2. Parboiling
3. Milling Characteristics of paddy
4. Physicochemical Properties of paddy/milled rice
5. Functional properties
6. Puffing/popping characteristics of parboiled milled rice
7. Flaking characteristics of cereals
2.1 Some physical grain characteristics of paddy/milled rice
Chen (2003) studied on the evaluation of air-oven moisture content
determination methods for rough rice. The effects of air oven drying temperature
and drying duration on moisture content determination of medium grain rough rice
were studied for moisture content levels from 10.2 to 32.5% (wb). Six different
methods were compared in this study. A moisture content determination model for
an air oven was developed to describe the effect of drying temperature, drying time,
and sample grinding on moisture content determination.
Reddy and Chakraverty (2004) showed that physical properties of raw and
parboiled paddy. The physical properties namely, size and shape, bulk density, true
density, and angle of repose at moisture contents ranging from 7.19 to 28.28% (db)
for raw paddy (IR-36) and from 12.24 to 43.53% (db) for parboiled paddy were
determined using standard techniques. Bulk density and angle of repose increased
from 522 to 566 kg/m3 and 42.35 to 49.308, respectively, with an increase in
moisture content from 7.19 to 27.86% (db) True density and porosity decreased
from 1405 to 1348 kg/m3
and from 62.84 to 58.01% respectively, with an increase
in moisture content from 7.19 to 27.86% (db). In the case of parboiled paddy, bulk
density and angle of repose increased from 507 to 564.8 kg/m3
and 39.90 to 43.898,
respectively, with an increase in moisture content from 12.24 to 43.53
(db) True density and porosity Decreased from 1411 to 1342 kg/m3 and from 64.08
to 57.91% respectively, with an increase in moisture content from 12.24 to 43.53%.
Varnamkhasti et al. (2009) discussed briefly some physical properties of
raw paddy. At a moisture content of 10% (wb), the average grain length, width, and
thickness were 8.54, 2.47 and 1.83 mm, respectively while the equivalent mean
diameter, surface area and volume were 3.4 mm, 32.58 mm2 and 21.06 mm
3,
respectively. The sphericity and aspect ratios were 39.88 and 0.29%, respectively.
True density, bulk density, and porosity were 1193.38 kg m-3
, 471.16 kg m-3
and
60.37%, respectively while the static coefficient of friction varied from 0.2186 on
the glass sheet to 0.4279 on plywood. The angle of repose for emptying was 35.830.
Zareiforoush et al. (2009) studied the various physical properties of two
different paddy cultivars were determined at five moisture content levels of 8, 11,
14, 18 and 21% per cent (db). In the case of Alikazemi cultivar, the average length,
width, thickness, equivalent diameter, surface area, volume, sphericity, thousand
grain mass and angle of repose were found to increase with the moisture content
increased from 8 to 21 per cent (db) respectively, for Hashemi cultivar. For
Alikazemi cultivar, the static coefficient of friction of grains increased linearly
against three various surfaces, namely, glass, galvanized iron sheet and plywood as
the moisture content increased from 8 to 21 per cent (db).
Ghadge and Prasad (2012) determined some of the physical properties of the
PR-106 type of rice variety which may influence the rice processing operations. The
physical properties Length or Longitudinal (L), Width (W), Thickness (T), Mass
(M) and Volume (V) were measured at a moisture content of 13.34 ± 0.53% (dry
basis) and the following results were obtained: the average split length, width,
thickness, unit mass, and volume were 6.61 mm, 1.75 mm, 1.40 mm, 0.017 g, and
0.051 cm3 respectively. The calculated physical properties like the geometric mean
diameter, surface area, porosity, sphericity, true density and aspect ratio were 2.52
mm, 20.10 mm2, 47.07%, 38.28%, 1.521 g/ml and 26.58% respectively. The static
coefficient of friction varied on three different surfaces from 0.217 on galvanized
steel sheet, 0.239 on Plywood to 0.249 on glass with splits perpendicular to
direction of motion, while the angle of repose was 34.86°.
Jouki and Khazaei (2012) determined that the physical and mechanical
properties of rice. The grain was tested for bulk density, true density, sphericity,
porosity, an angle of internal friction and coefficient of friction with various
materials at 12% moisture content (dry basis). The average length, width, thickness
and the average thousand grain weight of the rye grains were 7.43 mm, 2.75 mm,
2.53 mm and 26.91 g. The static coefficient of friction 0.4835, 0.4061, and 0.3670
for wood, galvanized iron and glass surfaces respectively. The higher friction
coefficient values were observed on a wood surface and the lowest on a steel
surface.
Kanchana et al. (2012) conducted to know the physical qualities of 41 rice
varieties. Length, Breadth, Bulk density and 1000 grains weight were determined.
The grain length varied from 0.33 to 0.43 cm, breadth 0.13 to 0.20 cm, 1000 grains
weight 14.0 to 18.5 g and bulk density 0.701 to 0.868 (g/ml). From this experiment
the rice varieties Karnataka ponni, CR, Ambai 16, Ambai 36 (Tirunelveli), ASD 19,
CR 1009 (Madurai) and CR 1 and Culture.F (Virudhunagar) provided more bulk
density and 1000 grains weight.
Mir et al. (2012) conducted on the evaluation of physical properties of rice
cultivars grown in the temperate region of india. Seven rice cultivars namely
Jehlum, K-332, Koshar, Pusa-3, SKAU-345, SKAU-382 and SR-1, grown in
temperate region of India, were studied for the variety difference in their physical
properties. Results showed the significant difference in the physical properties
including length, width, thickness, equivalent diameter, surface area, sphericity,
aspect ratio, volume, bulk density, true density, porosity, thousand kernel weight,
angle of repose and coefficient of friction among paddy and brown rice of cultivars
(p ≤ 0.05).
Bagheri et al. (2013) studied that some physical and milling properties for
five varieties of rough rice namely, Tarom, Khazar, Fajr, Nemat and Neda were
determined. The results revealed that rough rice of Nemat variety has the highest
mean length, width, equivalent diameter, grain volume and surface area. The Tarom
variety registered the lowest length, thickness, equivalent diameter and volume;
while the maximum thickness belonged to Neda variety. The bulk density for of
Neda was significantly different from the other four varieties. There was no
significant difference in the angle of repose among different varieties. The highest
static coefficient of friction was obtained on a mild steel surface, followed by
rubber and galvanized mild steel. In terms of milling properties, there was a
significant difference between some of the tested paddies. The highest broken
milled rice was obtained for Nemat variety and the lowest belonged to Fajr.
Basavaraj et al. (2015) introduced that the puffed rice is a popular snack
food product in India and has been widely produced for centuries. The different
physical properties viz., moisture content, angle of repose, the coefficient of
friction, bulk density were determined. The raw parboiled rice obtained from the
market is moistened to 13-14 % and kept the mass for overnight. The mass of the
material after initial roasting come down to 10.5 %. In the final roasting with sand,
the moisture content of puffed rice was 1-2 %. The angle of repose was recorded
20.50 for IR-64 variety. The coefficient of internal friction was recorded for IR-64
variety was 0.55. Higher the density results in higher expansion ratio. The bulk
density obtained for the IR-64 variety of rice was recorded as 0.607 g/cm3.
Vengaiah et al. (2015) studied that some physical properties such as shape,
size, weight, density, porosity, surface area, an angle of repose and angle of internal
friction of major cereals i.e. rice, wheat and maize were determined with standard
procedure and compared with literature and developed relationships between
properties. Although the recent scientific development has improved the handling
and processing of biomaterials through mechanical, thermal, electrical, optical, and
other techniques, little is known about the basic physical characteristics of these
materials. In developing country like India, there is a lot of scopes to develop
machinery for agricultural processing for this purpose basic information on physical
properties of products is necessary.
2.2 Parboiling
Bhattacharya and Swamy (1967) optimized, conditions of drying parboiled
paddy for optimum milling quality. Parboiled paddy dried in the shade had
excellent milling quality, but rapid drying with hot air (400-80
0C.) or in the sun gave
high breakage. The damage started as the moisture content reached 15% and
increased sharply with further drying. Milling at different time intervals after drying
demonstrated further that damage to the paddy occurred gradually only subsequent
to its removal from the dryer. From this it was found that keeping the paddy hot
after drying (conditioning) for about 2 hr prevented the milling breakage. Drying in
two stages with a tempering (2 hr if hot, 8 hr if at room temperature) just before
attainment of the critical moisture content (at 15.5-16.5%) also preserved milling
quality.
Banu (1995) studied on effect of soaking and steaming on parboiling,
milling, cooking and storage characteristics of some paddy varieties of
Chhattisgarh. The paddy samples were initially soaked for 4 h at 570C and then
steamed for 15 mins followed by shade drying for 24 h. These parboiled samples
were subjected to milling quality tests, cooking quality tests and determination of
degree of parboiling. Water uptake decreased from 473.77 to 428.19% for MTU
1010 and for 519.23% to 483.63% IR 64 variety of paddy. Extent of gelatinization
of rice samples increased as evidenced by higher values in EMC-S, alkali spreading
value, sedimentation volume, and water uptake ratio for parboiled samples in both
MTU 1010 and IR 64 varieties. The paddy varieties both MTU 1010 and IR 64,
water uptake and solid loss in gruel of raw and parboiled rice samples showed
declining trend throughout the storage period.
Miah et al. (2002) investigated the effect of soaking time on the quality of
parboiled rice. The paddy was soaked in water at 25 and 80 _C for 15, 30, 45, 60
and 120 min. The soaked paddy was steamed, dried, stored and milled. With
increasing soaking time a significant increase in water absorption and milling and
head rice yield (hence reduction in broken rice) was observed. A significant
difference in milling yield, at the 1% level, was obtained between the raw rice
control and the hot soaked parboiled samples. A large reduction in fissured grain
was observed after soaking. It is suggested that parboiling fills the void spaces and
cements the cracks inside the endosperm, making the grain harder and minimizing
internal fissuring and thereby breakage during milling.
Fofana et al. (2011) discussed about the efficiency of traditional,
intermediate and improved parboilers through their effects on certain physical and
cooking quality traits. Two varieties (NERICA 4 and Gambiaka) commonly
cultivated and consumed in Benin were used. Results showed that the traditional
parboiler had the highest level of heat-damaged grains (90%) with the improved
equipment having the least (17%). The improved and intermediate parboiling
technology produced grains of comparable hardness (4 kg and 6 kg, respectively,
for Gambiaka and NERICA 4) while the traditional method resulted in a sample
with the least hardness for both Gambiaka (4 kg) and NERICA 4 (3 kg). The
improved method and the intermediate technology using wooden sticks at the
bottom of the vessel had higher water uptake (2.97 ml/grain) and grain swelling
ratios (5.41) as compared to the traditional and intermediate methods using a
container with a perforated bottom.
Saeed et al. (2011) worked on the effect of parboiling on physicochemical &
cooking attributes of different rice cultivars. The current study was aimed to
elucidate the effect of parboiling on physicochemical and cooking attributes of
different rice varieties. The results indicated that parboiling has a less significant
effect on thousands kernel weight i.e. 15.51- 21.80g and 14.53-19.418g for raw and
parboiled fraction respectively. Length-breadth ratio exhibited a non-significant
effect of parboiling but less significant on bulk density. Parboiling demonstrated a
significant effect on the protein content of brown, milled rice and bran of all
varieties. Among cooking parameters, parboiling enhanced cooking time for milled
rice fractions but reduced cooking time for brown rice fraction. The results are
imperative for stockholders to select appropriate rice variety for a specific use.
Buggenhout et al. (2013) reported that the breakage susceptibility of raw
and parboiled rice. A main challenge of the rice industry is to minimize the
quantities of broken rice. Their tendency to break is primarily determined by
fissures, chalkiness, immaturity, and rice kernel dimensions, properties which are
both cultivar and rice grain history dependent. The intensity of processing of any
given rice feedstock determines the actual level of broken rice kernels. If performed
properly, parboiling, a three-step hydrothermal treatment consisting of soaking,
heating and drying of rough rice, substantially reduces the level of broken kernels.
Sarla (2013) studied on test milling of some common varieties of summer
paddy and kharif paddy grown in the state. Three varieties of paddy viz., MTU-
1010, IR-64 and Karma masuri were selected for parboiling soaking temperature
(60, 70, and 800C), soaking time (2, 3, 4h) and steaming time (15 min). The highest
HRY for varieties of Karma masuri (98.74%) followed by IR-64 (98.29%) and
MTU-1010 (97.92%) were obtained at the 800C soaking temperature with 4h
soaking time. It was observed during the experiments there was a well known
improvement in milling quality of paddy after parboling for MTU-1010, IR-64 and
Karma masuri varieties of paddy.
Bello et al. (2014) presented that hydrothermal treatment of rough rice. A
method involving hydration, tempering, and heating steps is presented to process
rough rice as an alternative to traditional parboiling with pressure steam. The effects
of temperature (66-84°C), tempering time (60-420 min) and heating time (30-180
min) on gelatinization degree and milling yield were analyzed by response surface
method (RSM). A maximum value of gelatinization degree (37.0%) and milling
yield of 67.7% were reached with a process temperature of 84 °C using tempering
and heating times of 178 and 104 min respectively. A slight reduction of
crystallinity (14%) and a significant improvement of nutritional value with
increments of 150 and 60% in riboflavin and calcium contents were obtained in
comparison with control (untreated rice). The proposed method, with lower
temperature requirements than traditional parboiling, is presented to obtain an
alternative product, expanding consumer choices.
Itagi and Singh (2015) discussed that the status in physical properties of
coloured rice varieties before and after inducing retro-gradation. Three varieties of
paddy in brown, red (non-waxy) and black (waxy) forms were de-husked and
milled before and after inducing retro-gradation and their physical properties were
studied. Normalized grain weight, porosity of parboiled paddy (PP) and its de-
husked rice (DR), were high compared to their respective native. True and bulk
density was lowest for black variety, its DR, its raw and parboiled forms compared
to other varieties of paddy. The angle of repose increased from raw paddy to PP
whereas it decreased from raw DR to parboiled DR. Under similar conditions of
milling of DR, raw and parboiled milled rice of black variety was the darkest. Raw
husk showed higher EMC compared to husk of parboiled. Hardness followed the
pattern: Raw: Paddy (~230-280 N)>DR (~120-260 N)>Milled rice (~110 N); for
parboiled: DR (~270-480 N)>PP (~260-425 N)> Parboiled milled rice (~250-340
N). Cooking time was high for DR of parboiled ones and least for waxy raw milled
rice.
2.3 Milling Characteristics of Paddy
Pal et al. (2013) investigated the effect of degree of polishing on physical
and milling properties of rice. Physical, gravimetric and milling properties were
analysed in the laboratory at different degree of polish ranging from 0 per cent to
11.31 per cent. Milling, head broken yield were significantly affected by degree of
polish.
Venkatachalapathy and Kumar (2013) studied the effects of continuous
steaming on milling characteristics of two indica rice varieties. Parboiling improves
milling characteristics of rice in a positive manner, which has been found to
influence consumers demand and acceptability. A laboratory model of continuous
steaming unit was fabricated and tested with two indica rice varieties, fine (ADT39)
and coarse (CO43) rice, at three different soaking temperatures (50, 60 and 700C)
for 4 h and five residence times of steaming (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5 and 3.0 min). The
effects of continuous steaming on milling characteristics of rice were studied and
compared with the values obtained from the control experiment (open steaming
process under laboratory conditions). The favourable conditions for continuous
parboiling of the fine variety ADT39 were identified as soaking at 700C for 4 h and
3.0 min residence time of steaming. These conditions showed head rice outturn of
74.0%. The favourable processing conditions for the coarse variety CO43 were
found to be 4 h of soaking at 600C and steaming of 3.0 min residence time, and at
these conditions, the head rice outturn was 73.9%.
Verma et al. (2014) conducted to study grain quality characteristics of Azad
Basmati and to compare with other prominent Basmati rice varieties. The result of
an experiment on various milling characteristics of Basmati rice varieties, among
which Azad basmati exhibited high hulling (73.53%), milling (65.77%) and the
highest head rice out-turn, having long-slender, translucent, creamy white kernels.
Kernel dimensions of Azad Basmati were satisfactory in respect of breadth (1.60
mm) and Length/Breath (L/B) ratio (3.93) but kernel length (6.28 mm) fell
marginally short than the desired minimum kernel length for Basmati rice (6.6 mm).
Azad Basmati turned-out to be the best in respect of hulling rice recovery (HRR)
(62.67%) as compared with all the check varieties (43 to 50%).
2.4 Physicochemical Properties of Paddy/Milled Rice
Landers et al. (1991) worked on the comparison of two models to predict
amylose concentration in rice flours as determined by spectrophotometric assay. A
spectrophotometric assay was used to test two models for predicting amylose in 16
solutions containing known concentrations of amylose and amylopectin and in 10
rice flours of unknown composition. The simple linear regression model based on
an amylose-only standard curve over- predicted amylose in all solutions (relative
bias of 7-32.9%). The model used for simultaneous estimation of amylose and
amylopectin was more accurate with some slight overprediction or underprediction
of amylose (<6%). The amylose-only method predicted amylose content to be 7.4%
for waxy flour and 16.4-25.4% for nonwaxy varieties. Defatted flours were
measured at 8.0% (waxy) and 18.4-29.6% (nonwaxy). Lower amylose content was
measured by the simultaneous estimation method. Predictions for the flours were
0% (waxy) and 6.6-14.2% (nonwaxy). Defatted flours had 0% (waxy) and 9.8-
22.0% (nonwaxy). This method resulted in greater accuracy, although use of
laboratory time and resources was not changed.
Tang et al. (1991) studied the inheritance of gel consistency in rice in
crosses involving high amylose, low-gelatinization temperature parents with hard,
medium and soft gel consistency. The results of single grain analysis of parents, F1,
F2, B1F1,B2F1, and their reciprocal crosses from a single season harvest showed
that the differences between hard and soft, hard and medium, and medium and soft
gel consistency are under monogenic control and that modifies affect the expression
of the trait.
Chang and Yang (1992) studied on the topic of thermal processing effects
on rice characteristics. Whole kernels of four cultivars of milled rice were treated
under different conditions according to our traditional methods such as boiling,
steaming, autoclaving or roasting with sand. During the various processing
conditions, the moisture contents of the kernel, heating temperatures, pressures and
heating times were varied. In this paper, the physicochemical properties of those
processed samples were investigated and compared. Based on degree of
gelatinization, water absorption index, water solubility index, swelling power,
viscoamylograms and X-ray diffraction patterns, the properties of waxy rice
samples arc different from that of non -waxy rice samples. They are also different
even among the non-waxy rice samples. Besides, each processed sample under
diverse treatments has its own properties. In boiled samples, the starch granules
almost gelatinized to form a film-like gel substance, whereas in other processed
samples, ungelatinized starch granules were noticeable.
Hettiarachchy et al. (1996) studied Physicochemical properties of three rice
varieties Textural properties of gels from La Grue, Bengal, and S201, were
investigated using the Universal Texture Analyzer, and pasting characteristics by
Brabender Visco/amylography. Gels from La Grue (long grain) had higher
fiacturability, hardness, amylographic consistency, and setback viscosity (P<0.05).
Gels from S201, a short grain variety, were harder and had higher fiacturability
values those from Bengal, a medium grain variety. Analysis of texture profiles of
rice gels could be an alternative to Brabender viscoamylographs for differentiating
among rice varieties. Tests on in-vitro starch digestibility showed that La Grue had
lower maltose released than S201 or Bengal during the first 15 and 45 min of
hydrolysis with human salivaly a-amylase.
Elbashir (2001) studied physicochemical properties and cooking quality of
long and short rice (Oryza Sativa) grains. Five rice grain samples namely long
(American (Parboiled rice), A; Pakistan, P, and Thailand, T) and short (Egyptian, E
and Sudanese, S) types were investigated for their physicochemical and cooking
quality characteristics. It was observed that cooked parboiled rice is harder and less
sticky than cooked raw rice. Texture of cooked rice seems to be improved with
increasing amylase content.
Bhattacharyya et al. (2004) observed the physical-chemical property of rice
starch depends under different treatments. Three different gelatinization processes
were performed boiling in water, steam heating, and enzymatic digestion. The
effects of gelatinization on viscoelastic property of rice starch were measured by
Instron Texture Analyser (London, UK). The 3-D structural changes of rice starch
after different treatments were determined by SEM. Various grooves and fissures on
the exterior surfaces of the granules were noticed in the treated sample compared to
control.
Mahadevamma and Tharanathan (2006) worked on the study of processed
rice starch characteristics and morphology. Processing of food grains is commonly
known to alter the bioavailability of both macroand micronutrients. Damaged starch
and resistant starch (RS) are the outcome of such processing treatments. The
content of the former in differently processed rice samples varied significantly,
which accounted for their easy digestibility compared to raw rice, whereas the
content of RS varied from 1.8 to 2.6%. GPC of processed rice samples on
Sepharose CL-2B revealed a considerable decrease (over 40%) in the amylose
content, and it also showed the considerable decrease in the molecular weight
values. DSC showed variations in the overall thermal characteristics of starch. X-
ray data showed V-type diffraction pattern for processed rice and RS. SEM revealed
characteristic morphological changes in the starch granules of processed rice
samples. The insoluble dietary fiber content (2-3%) of processed rice flours was a
threefold excess of that of soluble dietary fiber (˷1%).
Yadav et al. (2007) studied on Morphological, physicochemical and cooking
properties of some Indian rice cultivars (four non-basmati namely Jaya, P-44, HKR-
120, Sharbati and two basmati, namely HBC-19 and Bas-370). Length and breadth
of milled raw rice varied from 5.85 to 8.25 mm and 1.65 to 2.93 mm, respectively.
Different cultivars showed significant variations in their morphological, physico-
chemical and cooking propertiesThe water uptake and elongation ratio of rice
kernels were observed to show highly significant and positive correlation with
amylose content, with a correlation coefficient of 0.922 and 0.941 respectively
(p<0.01). The elongation ratio of cooked kernels showed a highly significant and
positive correlation with L/B ratio (r=0.945, p<0.01) and hardness (r=0.933,
p<0.01) of raw kernels.
Daomukda et al. (2011) compared the effect of cooking methods on
physicochemical properties of brown rice. The study aimed to compare the
chemical compositions and physicochemical properties of Jasmine brown rice
(Oryza sativa cultivar Kao Dok Mali 105). Brown rice was cooked by various
cooking methods, namely electric cooker, microwave oven, steaming, and the
conventional method. The results indicated that the conventional cooking method
significantly reduced protein and fat content. The lowest degree of gelatinization
was observed in rice cooked by steaming method. The water to rice ratio of 2:1
showed significantly higher on the hardness, chewiness, and cohesiveness, but
lower on the degree of gelatinization than those of other cooking methods.
Oko et al. (2012) investigated that the most of the physicochemical
characteristic such as amylose, amylopectin, gel consistency and gelatinization
temperature were significantly correlated (positively or negatively) with some of the
cooking quality traits (elongation during cooking, solids in cooking water and
optimum cooking time), indicating that efforts aimed at selecting rice varieties with
improved cooking quality traits would warrant a consideration of the physico-
chemical attributes of the rice grain. The overall cooking quality and
physicochemical attributes of some of the indigenous rice varieties were even
relatively better than the newly introduced hybrid varieties.
Ravi et al. (2012) studied the various quality aspects in terms of proximate
and nutrient composition, physical characteristics, milling characteristics and
physicochemical characteristics and cooking quality of organically grown
traditional Asian Indian rice variety - Salem samba. Based on its proximate
composition it was identified to give soft and non waxy cooked rice with medium
amylose content which is ideal for cooking. Based on milling characteristics it was
identified that parboiled milling is highly suitable. In terms of physiochemical
characteristics, the indigenous rice variety Salem samba was identified to have a
high intermediate gelatinization temperature and also formed a hard gel in terms of
its gel consistency.
Thumrongchote et al. (2012) showed that rice flours had different
properties, i.e. amylose content 18.64 - 34.19 %, damaged starch 2.52 - 6.38 %,
gelatinization temperature (Tonset) 70.48 - 77.72 0C and percent crystallinity 23.14
- 31.30. Based on these properties the flour samples could be divided into 2 groups:
Group 1 those having amylose content of 18 – 22 % (P1, HS, S2, and S60) had
Tonset 700C, percent retrogradation 32 - 40, and low final viscosity and setback,
Group 2 those having amylose content of 28 – 33 % (S1 and S3) had Tonset 770C,
percent retrogradation 55-59, and high final viscosity and setback. The relationship
among the properties of non-glutinous found that amylose leaching; gelatinization
temperature, functional properties, and pasting properties of rice flour were
correlated to amylose content.
Yu et al. (2012) evaluated physicochemical properties of starch and flour
from different rice cultivars. The starches and flours from four different rice
cultivars were evaluated for composition, crystallinity characteristics, blue value,
turbidity, swelling power, solubility, pasting properties, and textural and
retrogradation properties. The amylose content of starches and flours from different
rice cultivars differed significantly. The results showed that the physicochemical
properties of rice starch and rice flour were correlated to amylose content. The
crystallinity degree of rice starch and flour depended on amylose content. The blue
value, turbidity value, and gel hardness were positively correlated to amylose
content; however, the swelling power, solubility, and gel adhesiveness were
negatively correlated to amylose content. Furthermore, the pasting properties and
gel textural and retrogradation properties of rice flours were related to the structure
properties of rice starch. And the characteristics of starch, protein, and lipid
significantly influenced the turbidity, pasting properties, and gel textural and
retrogradation properties of rice flours.
Odenigbo et al. (2013 a) evaluated the gelatinization properties and amylose
content of rice varieties. Thirteen varieties (improved and local varieties) of non-
parboiled milled rice (Oryza sativa Linn) grown in Nigeria and Cameroun were
screened for gelatinization and amylose profile. Differential Scanning Calorimeter
(DSC) was used in determining the gelatinization enthalpy (DH), onset (To), peak
(Tp) and conclusion (Tc) temperatures. Amylose content varied from 8.59 % for
FARO 57, to 23.61 % for TOX 3145. Comparing samples of local varieties with
those of improved varieties showed higher values for onset and peak gelatinization
temperatures among local varieties. A significant and positive correlation was
observed in onset temperature, peak and conclusion temperatures while amylose
was negatively and weakly related to all gelatinization parameters.
Thomas et al. (2013) were evaluated proximate composition,
physiochemical properties, and cooking qualities of six different rice varieties
marketed in Penang, Malaysia (locally grown and imported). Between the various
rice varieties investigated, thousand kernel weight varied between 16.97-19.43 g,
length/breadth (l/b) ratio was between 2.09-3.75, while bulk density varied between
0.81-0.86 g/ml. Amylose content was highest (27.71%) in white rice (local, medium
grain type) with lowest recorded for brown rice variety (3.36%). The water uptake
ratio ranged between 2.33 to 3.95 and was low in glutinous rice (2.33), while gruel
solid loss (range from 3.17 to 6.43) was lowest in Basmati rice variety (3.17%). A
positive correlation was recorded for both amylose content and l/b ratio in relation
to elongation of cooked rice. These results highlight cooking and physiochemical
properties of rice to be strongly dependent on their amylose content. Results
generated in this study might be able to provide vital information on identifying
‘superior quality of rice' marketed in Penang, based on their proximate composition
as well as on their physiochemical and cooking properties.
Odenigbo et al. (2014 b) discussed about quality parameters of milled rice.
Three differently processed samples of TOX 3145: non-parboiled (NP), traditional
parboiled (TP) and IRAD parboiled (IRAD) were involved in this study. The result
revealed the grain dimension of samples as long and slender shape. The degree of
redness among cooked and uncooked grains varied from -0.8 to -1.0 and 0.3 to 1.5,
respectively while yellowness parameter ranged between 0.4 to 4.0 and 7.6 to 8.4,
respectively. Lightness parameter (L*) varied from 59.4 to 61.8 in cooked samples.
The NP sample had lowest adhesiveness (-0.76 J) and highest gumminess (6.40 J).
Water uptake was positively correlated with amylose content (r = 0.84; P < 0.05)
and lightness parameter (r = 0.92; P < 0.05). This study provides information on the
physical, thermal, gelatinization and cooking characteristics of TOX 3145 rice in its
raw and parboiled forms as consumed in Cameroon.
2.5 Functional Properties
Shittu et al. (2012) studied physical and water absorption characteristics of
some improved rice varieties. The physical dimensions (length, breadth and width,
length/width ratio, equivalent diameter), grain surface area and volume, sphericity,
1000-kernel weight, bulk and true densities as well as porosity were determined.
The physical characteristics of the rice varieties differed significantly (p<0.05). The
rice grains were of medium size with length/width ratio ranging between 2.80 and
3.50. The equilibrium moisture content was significantly influenced (p<0.01) by the
soaking temperature and the rice component being soaked. The hydration rate
curves were generally characterized by two falling rate periods. The predicted water
absorption curves were very close to experimental curves (0.91<r2<1.00, p<0.01).
The interspecific variety (NERICA 1) had higher effective moisture diffusivity
compared to the early maturing O. Sativa varieties.
Thilakarathna et al. (2015) experimented on four popular paddy varieties in
Sri Lanka, BG 300, BG352, BG366 and AT307 for their physical and functional
properties. According to the research outcome, most of the physical properties were
significantly different (p<0.05) among the varieties while some similarities (p>0.05)
were also observed. To investigate the water absorption capacity of different paddy
varieties in terms of moisture gain, the paddy varieties were immersed in hot water
at 700C for 5 hours. Samples were drawn from respective paddy variety for every
30minutes in order to measure the moisture absorption. According to the results,
during the initial stage of soaking, all paddy varieties illustrated rapid moisture
increment. Afterward the rate of moisture increment was gradually declined and
attained to the saturation point, where the moisture variations were insignificant
(P>0.05) for paddy varieties. Until reaching to the saturation point, moisture
absorption pattern of paddy varieties were significantly different (p<0.05).Results
indicated that highest and lowest moisture increment was recorded by BG300 and
BG366 respectively. The soaking time and varietal differences were also
significantly influenced (P<0.05) on water absorption capacities.
2.6 Puffing/Popping Characteristics of Parboiled Milled Rice.
Villareal and Juliano (1987) studied varietal differences in quality
characteristics of puffed rice. Varieties differing in amylose content (AC) and final
gelatinization temperatures (GT) were used to study the most suitable rice for three
methods of producing puffed rice. Among the nine rice parboiled for 10 min. at
1000C, waxy and low-AC rice gave higher puffed volume than higher AC non-
waxy rice; after parboiling at 1270C, most intermediate and high-AC rice gave as
high a volume expansion on puffing as waxy and low-AC rice. Thus after complete
starch gelatinization (similar water uptake), non-waxy rice gave volume expansion
as high as waxy rice. Expansion ratio on heating in a puffing gun for 3-7 min. To
11.3 kg/cm2
pressure or 200-2100C was higher for waxy milled rice than for non-
waxy rice. corresponding to 81-97% drop in gel viscosity. Protein content was
negatively correlated with an expansion ratio of puffed rice. Minimal losses of
lysine, cysteine, and tryptophan in puffed products were observed.
Mahanta and Bhattacharya (2009) developed relationship of starch changes
to puffing expansion of parboiled rice. ‘Intan’ variety of paddy (Oryza sativa) was
tested for puffing. It was parboiled under a wide range of paddy moisture content,
steaming pressure and time, as also temperature and time of sand heating. The
resulting milled rices were studied for their diverse properties including puffing.
Indices of starch changes in the samples were calculated as: (1) gelatinisation index
from the solubility of amylose in 0.2 N KOH; (2) amylopectin retrogradation from
the post-production drop in room-temperature hydration power of the parboiled
paddy during air-drying, (3) thermal breakdown of starch from the drop in gel
permeation chromatographic fraction I of starch; lipid-amylose complexation
indirectly from (4) drop in rate of water uptake during cooking and (5) cooked-rice
firmness. It was found that the puffing expansion was very highly correlated with
the combined above 5 indices of starch changes, as much as 90% of the variation in
puffing being explainable on that basis. Puffing was promoted by gelatinisation as
well as lipid-amylose complexation, but was retarded by amylopectin retrogradation
and probably starch breakdown.
Maisont and Narkrugsa (2009 a) studied the effects of some
physicochemical properties on the qualities of puffing rice (puffed yield, expansion
volume, expansion ratio and bulk density) using microwaves at a frequency of
2450MHz and power at 800 watts. It was found that the amylose content (range
5.58-21.24%) was strongly negatively correlated with all qualities of puffed rice:
puffed yield (r=-0.95**), expansion volume (r=-0.82**), expansion ratio (r=-
0.79**) and bulk density (r=-0.78**). The starting time of puffing negatively
correlated with puffed yield (r=-0.67*), while tightness of husk (lemma-palea)
interlocking, thickness of ventral region layer, husk content, width and length of
brown rice were unrelated to puffed rice quality. Amylose content could explain the
puffing qualities of puffing rice. The coefficient of determination (R2), for the
linear correlation with amylose content with regard to the quality of rice puffing for
puffed yield, expansion volume, expansion ratio and bulk density was 0.91, 0.67,
0.62 and 0.61, respectively.
Maisont and Narkrugsa (2010 b) investigated the effects of salt, moisture
content and microwave power on the puffing qualities of puffed rice. Paddy rice
was adjusted with water and 2% salt solution at four moisture levels 10, 13, 16 and
19% (wb) and puffed with microwave power at 600, 700 and 800 watts. The results
showed that all the main factors and their interactions significantly (p<0.05)
affected the puffing qualities of total puffed yield, fully puffed yield, small puffed
yield, expansion volume, texture, colour and microstructure. The results suggested
that high puffed yield and expansion volume with moderate hardness was produced
using soaked paddy rice at 2% salt solution, 13% moisture content and puffed with
700 or 800 watts microwave power.
Bhatt and Joshi (2014) worked on the topic of standardization of
pretreatments for production of ready-to-puff rice using microwave energy. Puffing
of rice is an important unit operation for conversion of pregelatinized milled rice in
to ready-to-eat snacks. To increase sudden vapor pressure in the grain during the
volumetric heating, external coating or layer over rice may provide the vapor
pressure. Combinations of pre-treatments of salt (0, 1, 2, 3%), soy protein (0, 2, 4,
6%) and guar gum (0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5%) were evaluated for the puffing quality with
respect to puffing yield, volume expansion ratio and overall acceptability. The good
quality “ready-to-puff” rice can be produced by pre-treating the milled rice with 3%
salt. The ready-to-puff rice can be puffed as per the convenience using domestic
microwave oven.
Dutta and Mahanta (2014) followed traditional methods for parboiled rice
based products and scientifically developed for preparation and industrialization of
rice. The state of Assam, India produces a large number of rice varieties, some of
which are traditionally processed into peculiar parboiled rice products like Hurum,
Komal chaul, Bhoja chaul and Sandahguri, which are of both ethnic and possible
commercial importance. In spite of extensive research carried out on parboiled rice,
these products, and their special parboiling techniques have not been sufficiently
explored. The status of research on parboiled rice as a whole with special attention
to these lesser-known specialty products of Assam is extensively reviewed. Future
scope of research on these products is also identified.
Joshi et al. (2014 a) worked on the varietal selection of some indica rice for
production of puffed rice. Twelve varieties of indica rice were screened for the best
puffing quality based on their chemical composition and physical characteristics
such as amylase content, protein content, length, width, thickness, hardness, husk
content, true density, and bulk density. The data were analyzed using Pearson’s
correlation, and a strong positive correlation was found to exist between amylose
content and expansion ratio. At the same time, protein content was found to be
negatively related with amylose content, length expansion ratio, and volume
expansion ratio. From the analysis Gurjari, Jaya, GR-5, and GR-6 varieties were
found to be suitable for puffing.
Joshi et al. (2014 b) studied puffing characteristics of parboiled milled rice
in a domestic convective–microwave oven and process optimization. Puffing
characteristics were studied for Gurjari variety of rice at 14 % (wb) moisture
content for different preheating temperatures of the glass base plate (180, 200, and
220°C), microwave power level (300, 600, and 900 W), and residence time (10-100
s), from which the range of residence time was selected for the optimization study.
It was found that the puffing of rice was better at a higher power level and
preheating temperature of the base plate and puffing started only after certain
residence time. The optimized conditions were found to be 14% (wb), 2200C, 900
W, and 60 seconds.
Mishra et al. (2014) studied popping is a simultaneous starch gelatinization
and expansion process, during which grains are exposed to high temperatures for
short time. During this process, super heated vapour produced inside the grains by
instantaneous heating, cooks the grain and expands the endosperm suddenly,
breaking out the outer skin. Puffing is a process in which controlled expansion of
kernel is carried out, while the vapour pressure escapes through the micropores of
the grain structure due to high pressure or thermal gradient. There are different
methods of popping/puffing used viz., conventional method of dry heat, sand and
salt treated, hot air popping, gun puffing, popping in hot oil and by microwave
heating. Though a wide range of cereals and millets such as rice, wheat, corn,
sorghum, ragi, foxtail millet are used for popping/puffing; only few of them pop
well. The reason behind this may be the factors which influence popping qualities
of cereals, such as season, varietal difference, grain characteristics such as moisture
content, composition of grain, physical characteristics, types of endosperm, and also
the method of popping.
Kamaraddi and Prakash (2015) carried out assessment of suitability of
selected rice varieties for production of expanded rice. Expanded rice, prepared
from pre-gelatinized milled rice by sand roasting method, is a popular snack food of
India. Five high-yielding rice varieties of Hill zone of Karnataka state, viz., IET-
13901, KHP-2, KHP-5, KHP-10, and Intan were screened for puffing quality based
on their physicochemical, functional, nutritional and organoleptic parameters with
Rajamudi as local check. The effect of varietal differences on expansion/puffing
quality parameters, in vitro digestibility of starch and protein as well as
bioaccessibility of iron, zinc, and calcium were determined. Results indicated a
strong positive correlation between amylose content and expansion ratio and a
negative correlation between protein and amylose content, length expansion ratio
and volume expansion ratio. Expansion characteristics showed that the varieties
suitable for production of puffed rice were KHP-2, IET-13901 and Intan.
Nutritional analysis showed following ranges of nutrient content in expanded rice:
protein, 6.22–8.17%; fat, 0.06–0.14%; and as mg/100 g calcium, 20.5–23.5; iron,
2.01–2.72; zinc, 1.22–1.82; thiamine, 0.315–0.470; riboflavin, 0.051–0.069; and
niacin, 3.18–4.68. Nearly 80.3–80.8% starch and 67.6–83.2% protein was
digestible. Among all varieties, KHP-2 had lowest amount of rapidly digestible
starch (61.4%). Mineral bioaccessibility ranged from 42.7 to 52.1%. Sensory
analysis indicated that Intan and KHP-2 were superior and suited for production of
expanded rice.
2.7 Flaking characteristics of cereals
Sailja (1992) studied on the topic of the popping and flaking quality of
sorghum cultivars in relation to physicochemical characteristics and in vitro starch
and protein digestibility. Physical and chemical properties of grain affect the
processing and food-making properties. On processing various physicochemical
challenges occur which are beneficial and also detrimental to the quality. Wide
variation among cultivars was observed in the physicochemical and starch
properties of the grain. Popping and flaking methods were standardised using two
cultivars. Taste panel evaluation showed significant variation among cultivars for
all the sensory qualities of pops. In flakes the colour and appearance, and texture
showed significant variation among cultivars. Physicochemical characters of grain
such as bulk density, floaters percent, endosperm texture, amylose content showed
strong association ~11th the popping and flaking quality. Swelling power, solubility
of starch, pasting temperature and viscosity of flour also showed significant
relationship ~11th the popping and flaking quality parameters.
Mujoo and Ali (1997) studied that the susceptibility of starch to in vitro
hydrolysis by different enzymes in raw rice, flaked rice and intermediary products
obtained at various stages during processing of rice to flakes. Starch hydrolysis was
lowest, namely 100 to 370 g/kg, in raw rice but increased to 410 to 870 g/kg after
processing and up to 100% after cooking, depending on the enzymes used and the
assay conditions selected. Starch degradation was maximal after treatment with
pancreatin followed by amyloglucosidase and least by á-amylase. However,
addition of pepsin increased the susceptibility of starch hydrolysis indicating that a
fraction of starch might be complexed with protein. This appeared to be the case
with flakes obtained by single pressing in a heavy duty cereal roller flaker rather
than those produced by repeated gradual pressing in an edge-runner. Conditions
favourable for starch retrogradation and also deep-fat frying of flakes reduced the
susceptibility of starch to enzyme hydrolysis. Heat treatment of moist paddy (rice)
and mechanical damage during flaking increased the availability of starch in rice to
enzymic hydrolysis. A part of starch got complexed with protein, thereby partly
decreasing its susceptibility to hydrolysis.
Chitra et al. (2009) studied effect of processing paddy on digestibility of rice
starch by in vitro studies. Paddy (Oryza sativa L) (variety ‘IR – 64’), was parboiled,
puffed by sand roasting and flaked by edge runner and roller flaker and variations in
physical and physicochemical properties were studied. Moisture contents were
lower (5.8–10.8%) in processed rice products compared to raw materials (11.8%).
Ratio of rice to sand in the case of puffed rice preparation was optimized. The
equilibrium moisture content was 27.4% in raw rice while it was much higher
(38.9–81.0%) in processed rice. Sedimentation volume was lowest (6.2 ml) in raw
rice and highest (18.8 ml) in popped rice. Starch content was 84.8 and 76.5–83% in
raw and processed rice, respectively. In vitro starch digestibility was highest in
roller flaker flakes and lowest in raw milled rice. Among the ready to eat products,
popped rice showed least starch digestibility (~30%).
Deepa and Singh (2011) evaluated nutrient changes and functional
properties of rice flakes prepared in a small scale industry. Four varieties of paddy
were soaked in hot water, drained, roasted in an industrial roaster, tempered, flaked
and passed through roller. Moisture content reduced from about 35% in paddy to 11
– 13% in the flakes. Equilibrium moisture content was high (83- 85%) in roller pass
flakes compared to edge runner flakes. Total amylose equivalent varied from 21 to
23% in flakes of edge runner (ER) while that of roller pass were ~22%. Soluble
amylose varied from 10 to 14% in flakes of ER and 11 to 13% in flakes of ER+RP.
Protein contents were high in ER flakes, but reduced to an extent of 6 to 30% in
roller pass flakes. Significant changes in phosphorus, vitamins; riboflavin and
niacin contents were not recorded among two types of flakes. Pasting profile
parameters indicated that the initial viscosity ranged from 280 to 550 BU in all
flakes. Peak viscosity was low compared to initial value in all flakes with exception
in MTU 1001 variety. Swelling power remained almost same in both type of flakes,
however the solubility was high in BPT 5204 variety in ER + RP flakes. In MTU
1001, the solubility in ER flakes was high compared to ER + RP flakes.
Considerable nutrient losses occurred in the flakes obtained after passing through
the rollers, except whitening of the flakes.
Adekoyeni et al. (2015) studied on the topic of the effect of paddy storage
duration and processing parameters (soaking time, parboiling temperature and
drying temperature) on quality of ofada rice in the production of ready to eat flakes
using response surface methodology. The optimum storage duration and processing
parameters for treatment of ofada paddy in the production of ready to eat flake
include storage of paddy for 9 months, soaking for 4 days and 17 h, parboiling 106
0C and drying at 30 C to yield optimum quality of ofada rice flakes. The sensory
assessment showed significant acceptability of colour, crispiness, aroma, taste and
overall acceptability.
Kumar et al. (2016) studied on physico-chemical, functional, pasting and
morphological characteristics of developed extra thin flaked rice. The major
dimensions were highest for extra thin flaked rice (ETFR) with 17.08 mm length
and 8.50 mm breadth at the expense of thickness found to be lowest 1.16. Thousand
kernel weight (TKW), bulk density (BD), true density (TD) and porosity (POR) of
ETFR were lowest as compared to other products. Frictional properties did not
show any significant difference (p< 0.05%) except for angle of repose. Significant
difference was observed in chemical and functional properties of ETFR with
exception to water absorption index (WAI) and water solubility index (WSI).
Optical parameters L*, a* and b* values of EFTR were found to be 73.72, 0.39 and
9.60, respectively significantly different from brown and roasted paddy. Peak and
final viscosity was highest for brown rice (4419 cP, 6351 cP) and lowest for roasted
rice (1058 cP, 1525 cP). Morphological changes occurring due to disintegration of
starch granules within ETFR were clearly visible within its matrix caused by high
mechanical force and temperature.
Takhellambam et al. (2016) studied ready-to-cook millet flakes based on
minor millets for modern consumer. Millets such as little, proso, barnyard and ragi
were explored for processing into Ready-To-Cook (RTC) millet flakes to meet the
needs of modern consumers. Physico-functional and nutrient composition of RTC
millet flakes were evaluated against the control (oats flakes and rice
flakes).Variation in physical, functional and nutrient composition were observed
among the flakes. The RTC flakes of minor millets were smaller in size and density
but more fragile and crisp than the commercial oats and rice flakes. Higher flake
volume (16.35 ml) and lower bulk density was recorded in little millet flakes (0.15
g/ml). Good cooking properties were recorded in all millet flakes. Lowest fat
content (0.40 g/100 g) was recorded in little millet flakes whereas proso millet
flakes exhibited highest crude protein (14.72 g/100 g) and dietary fiber (21.56 g/100
g). Among the millet flakes, RTC little millet flake was most acceptable in terms of
sensory quality and also exhibited good shelf life of four months at ambient
temperature of 24-31 °C. The microbial load decreased during storage period and
was within permissible limits.
CHAPTER-III
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In this chapter, various materials, instrument, equipment, techniques and
experimental procedures used to fulfil the objectives of present investigation have
been dealt with. The work was carried out in the Department of Agricultural
Processing and Food Engineering, FAE, IGKV, Raipur (C.G.), Department of
Genetics and Plant Breeding and Department of Plant Physiology, Agril.
Biochemistry, Medicinal & Aromatic Plants, College of Agriculture IGKV, Raipur
(C.G.).
The first section of this chapter deals with some physical properties of paddy
grains, rice, puffed rice and flaked rice. This section also includes milling
characteristics of paddy i.e. hulling and milling efficiency etc. The second section
deals with the different pre-treatments (parboiling i.e. soaking, steaming and drying,
roasting, puffing and flaking) on the processing of selected paddy varieties are used.
The third section deals with the quality analysis of all processed products of
different varieties of paddy grains.
3.1 Experimental Site
The study was conducted in the Department of Agricultural Processing and
Food Engineering, Swami Vivekanand College of Agricultural Engineering and
Technology and Research Station, Faculty of Agricultural Engineering, Indira
Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur (C.G.)
3.2 Geographical Situation
Raipur is the capital of Chhattisgarh state and lies at 21° 14° 02’ North
latitude and 81° 43° 11’ East longitude at an altitude of 298 m above the MSL.
3.3 Climatic Condition
Raipur, the place of investigation comes under Chhattisgarh plane sub
humid zone of the state. The mean annual rainfall is 1326 mm out of which 85 per
cent is received between the middle of June to end of the September. The maximum
temperature during the summer month reaches as high as 46 °C a
minimum goes as low as 6 °C during the winter months. The relative humidity is
high from June to October and shown a declining trend thereafter with as absolute
minimum during peak winter (January).
3.4 Raw Material Procurement
Three varieties of paddy, Mahamaya, Barhasaal and Durgeshwari (IGKV
R2) grown in Kharif season 2015 were selected for the present investigation. The
material was properly cleaned and graded to have a uniform sample. The samples
of paddy varieties were procured from the Department of Plant Breeding and
Genetics and National Seed Project, IGKVV, Raipur (C.G.).
3.5 Physical Methods
The different physical properties viz., moisture content, thousand grain
mass, length, width, thickness, grain shape, sphericity, geometric mean diameter,
surface area, aspect ratio, bulk density, true density, angle of repose, coefficient of
friction, milling characteristics were determined. The details of the procedure to
measure the above parameters were explained in the following sub sections.
3.5.1 Moisture content
The moisture content of the sample was determined by standard air- oven
method (Ranganna, 1995). A test sample of 5 g was kept for 24 hours in hot air
electric oven maintained at 105°C. After 24 h the sample was drawn from the oven
and placed in desiccators for cooling to ambient temperature. After cooling the
weight of the sample was taken precisely. The loss in weight was determined and
moisture content was calculated using the following expression:
Where,
W1 = Initial weight of wet material sample (g);
W2 = Final weight of dried sample (g).
Fig.3.1: Measurement of moisture content by hot air oven
3.5.2 Thousand grain mass
The 1000 grain mass was determined by selecting different lots of 1000
sound grains by counting from a general lot, weighing them using electronic
balance. The average value of 3 replications was taken.
3.5.3 Dimensions
100 grains were randomly selected and their three principle dimensions
(length, width and thickness) were measured using a venire calliper to an accuracy
of 0.01 cm. Length (L) is defined as the distance from the tip cap to the kernel
crown. Width (W) is defined as the widest point to point measurement taken
parallel to the face of the kernel and thickness (T) is defined as the distance
between the two kernel faces.
3.5.4 Sphericity
The sphericity φ, expresses the characteristics shape of a solid object
relative to that of a sphere of the same volume and defined as the ratio or the
surface area of the sphere having the same volume as that of the grain to the
surface area of the grain, was determined as (Mohsenin, 1986)
Where,
= degree of sphericity (%);
L = grain length (cm);
W= grain width (cm);
T= grain thickness (cm).
3.5.5 Geometric mean diameter
The geometric mean diameter of the sample was calculated by following a
formula, which is given by Sreenarayanan et al., (1985) and Sharma et al. (1985).
Dg = (LWT) 1/3
…3.3
Where,
Dg = geometric mean diameter (cm);
L = length (cm);
W= width (cm);
T = thickness (cm).
3.5.6 Surface area
The surface area (Sa) was calculated using the relationship given by
McCabe et al., which is as follows:
Sa =π (Dg) 2
…3.4
Where,
Sa = surface area (cm2);
Dg = geometric mean diameter (cm).
3.5.7 Aspect ratio
Aspect ratio is the ratio of width to length of grains, which was determined
by using this expression:
3.5.8 Bulk density
Bulk density was determined by filling a measuring cylinder of 150 ml with
grains by pouring it from a certain height, striking off the top level and then
weighing the contents on a balance. The ratio of a weight of the sample and
volume occupied by it is expressed as the bulk density, g/ml.
3.5.9 True density
True density was determined by adding 5 g of paddy grains in 25 ml
toluene in 100 ml measuring cylinder. The final volume was noted and true volume
of paddy sample was determined from the difference. The true density of the
sample was expressed as the ratio of weight of sample and the true volume, g ml;
(Joshi et al. 1993).
3.5.10 Angle of repose
The angle of repose for the grain was determined by the method suggested
by Waziri and Mettal (1983); the grain was heaped over a circular disc of 50 mm
diameter by allowing them to fall from a height of 150 mm until maximum height
was reached. The height was replicated ten times and readings were recorded. The
angle of repose was determined by the following relationship:
Where,
= angle of repose, (degree);
H = height of the cone (cm);
D = diameter of circular disc (cm).
3.5.11 Coefficient of static friction
The coefficient of static friction for Mahamaya, Barhasaal and IGKV R2
varieties of paddy grains was determined against four different surfaces namely
glass, rubber, iron sheet and plywood. These are common materials used for
handling and processing of grains and construction and storage of drying bins. A
hollow rectangular metal box dimensions of length 80 mm, width 80mm and depth
40 mm and open at both ends (top and bottom portion) was filled with seeds and
placed on an adjusting tilting table such that the hollow rectangular metal box does
not touch the table surface. The tilting surface was raised gradually by means of a
screw device until the metal box just starts to slide down. The angle of the surface
was read from a scale and the static coefficient of friction was taken as the tangent
of this angle. The coefficient of friction was calculated from the following
relationship:
Where,
= coefficient of static friction;
= angle of tilt in degrees.
3.5.12 Milling characteristics
Milling was done in the Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding
Laboratory in, IGKV, Raipur Chhattisgarh. Only sound grains were used for the
experiment. The moisture content (mc) of the various samples was determined
using the digital moisture meter before milling. The initial moisture of the samples
was 11.39 – 12 % (wb). Hundred grams of the paddy of each varieties were de-
husked using a rubber roll Satake testing husker. Rice and husk was obtained after
dehusking. The Satake abrasive whitener was used to polish the rice for one minute
to obtain the white rice (milling yield). A standard mesh was used to separate the
grains above 3/4th grain size are considered as the head rice, size in the range 1/2th
to 3/4th
size were graded as course broken, between 1/4th
and 1/2th
were termed as
medium brokens and below 1/4th
size are termed as the fine brokens. In the
presence course of investigation, the grading was done by hand. The weights
obtained were recorded after each operation. The weights were used to determine
the Hulling and Milling characteristics, Head Rice Percentage (HRR), Broken Rice
Percentage (BRP).
3.5.12.1 Hulling percentage
Hulling percentage of rice not depend only upon the efficiency of hulling
equipments but also upon other factors like drying, storage and characteristics of
paddy variety. The hulling percentage (HP) is calculated by the following formula:
Where,
HP=Hulling percentage (%);
Ha= Weight of rice after hulling (g);
Hb= Weight of paddy before hulling (g).
Fig.3.2: Satake rubber rolls sheller for dehusking
3.5.12.2 Milling percentage
Weight of polished rice includes head and broken also. The Milling
percentage is calculated by the following formula suggested by (Mandhyan and
Sharma, 1992)
Total rice = Broken rice + Head rice
Where,
MP = Milling percentage, (%);
Ma = Total weight of rice after milling, (g);
Mb = Total weight of rice before milling, (g)
Fig. 3.3: Satake whitener for polishing of rice
3.6 Preparation of Thick and Thin Size Flaked Rice
Flaked rice in two different sizes was prepared at Agro-industries situated
at a district Salhekasa (MH). The process of product development is depicted in the
flow diagram and Fig 3.2 to 3.7 shows the step involved in process of preparation
of flaked rice. Raw paddy was soaked in the water for 24 hr at room temperature to
increase its moisture content up to 30-32 %. This was followed by complete
removal of water from soaking tank and the soaked paddy was conveyed through a
bucket into the hopper of the paddy roaster operated at the higher temperature for a
short period of time in fine sand (172- 174 0C for 35-40 seconds). The process
results in drying of husk with its internal moisture content in the range of 17-19 %
yielding roasted paddy that was immediately conveyed to the rice flaking machine
operating at 1440 rpm by 3 HP electric motor. The machine resulted in the
formation of flaked rice (35-40 seconds for thick size flakes and for 65-85 seconds
for thin size flakes), that was passed further cleaned in a cleaning unit to separate
any broken and husk from flaked rice.
3.7 Method of Preparing Flaked Rice
Paddy
Soaking (M.C. 30-34%, Temp. 28-30 0C)
Soaked paddy
Roasting (Sand Temp. 172 ±2 0C)
Roasted paddy (M.C. 17- 19 %, Temp. 100-102 0C)
Heated paddy in edge runner
Thick and Thin size
Sieving and cleaning
Flaked rice
Fig.3.4: Process flow chart for the development of the different size flaked rice
Fig. 3.5: Draining of soaked water Fig. 3.6: Soaked paddy in buckets
Fig. 3.7: Roasting unit Fig. 3.8: Edge runner machine
Fig. 3.9: Cleaning unit Fig. 3.10: Flaked rice
3.8 Physical and Functional Properties of Flaked Rice
3.8.1 Recovery of flaked rice
After flaking process the flaked rice was thoroughly cleaned for husk and
bran. The cleaned flaked rice was separated into whole and broken.
3.8.2 Bulk density
Bulk density was determined by filling a measuring cylinder of 150 ml with
grains by pouring it from a certain height, striking off the top level and then
weighing the contents on a balance. The ratio of weight of sample and volume
occupied by it, is expressed as the bulk density, g/ml.
3.8.3 True density
True density was determined by adding 5 g of paddy grains in 25 ml
toluene in 100 ml measuring cylinder. The final volume was noted and true volume
of paddy sample was determined from the difference. The true density of the
sample was expressed as the ratio of a weight of the sample and the true volume,
g/ml; (Joshi et al. 1993).
3.8.4 Water Absorption Index and Water Solubility Index
The WAI and WSI of rice flour samples were determined following the
method described by Kadan et al. One gram (1.00 g) of dried flour sample was
accurately weighed and suspended in 6 ml of distilled water and shaken in water
bath at 80 0C for 30 min. The content was centrifuged at 2,500 rpm (Universal
32R, Hettich Zentrigugen, Germany) for 10 min. The supernatant was carefully
poured into an aluminum dish (of known weight) before drying at 105 0C for 10 h
and weighing. The sediment was collected and weighed. The WAI and WSI were
calculated from equations (3.14) and (3.15).
Fig. 3.11 Waterbath for rice flour sample
3.8.5 Swelling Power (SP)
The SP of rice flour samples was determined by measuring water uptake of
the samples. The 500 mg of rice flour was weighed into centrifuge tube and 15 ml
of distilled water was added. The suspension was heated in water bath at 80 0C for
30 min and then centrifuged at 4,000 rpm for 20 min. The supernatant was
carefully poured into aluminum dish (of known weight) before drying at 105 0C to
constant weight and weighing. The sediment was collected and weighed. SP was
calculated using equation (3.16):
Where,
Sp = Swelling power (g/g);
Wws = weight of wet sediment (g),
Wf = weight of rice flour (g),
Wds = weight of dry solids in supernatant (g)
3.8.6 Water Uptake (WU)
It was measured by taking 2 g sample in a graduated test tube and pour 10
ml of water into test tube, let it soak for 3 minutes. Then boil it for 45 minutes at
77 0C to 80
0C in a constant temperature using water bath and keep 2-3 test tubes
with 10 ml water as control with the samples in the water bath. Immediately place
the tubes in a beaker containing cold water for cooling. Poured the supernatant
water into graduated cylinder after cooling and note the water levels. These can be
calculated as -
3.9 Standardization of Puffed Rice
3.9.1 Preparation of parboiled milled rice
About 1 kg of paddy variety of Mahamaya, IGKV R2 (Durgeshwari), and
Barhasal were cleaned for parboiling. The cleaned paddy was boiled for 40-45
min. and after boiling, the temperature of soak water drops to 60-70 0C within two
hours. Boiled paddy was soaked in the hot water for overnight after which the
water is drained off. The colour of the soak water turns brown. The soaked paddy
is boiled in the same container for steaming with remaining poured water in the
container for 35-40 min. until the husks just begin to crack open. Paddy was kept
for the sun drying about to 4-6 hr. After drying of paddy, tempered for 1-2 hr and
dried paddy was shelled using iron mortar and pestle. Prepared pre-gelatinized
milled rice was used for preparing puffed rice.
3.9.2 Puffed rice by using a continuous fluidized bed rice puffing machine
Prepared pre-gelatinized rice of Mahamaya, IGKV R2, and Barhasal were
used for puffing in a continuous fluidized bed rice puffing machine. First preparing
conditioned rice as well mixing of salt solution about to 2% until an adhesive misty
layer is formed on the grain surface. The treated rice was warmed in a pan at about
to 80-100 0C for 10-15 min. and kept in between folded cloth for tempering. The
tempered product is roasted in for a few min. and the warmed paddy is taken to the
puffing machine.
The conditioned rice was continuously fed into the glass puffing vessel
through the feed hopper continuously. The desired puffing temperature was set at
temperature controller. The air velocity was set using variable speed drive. The
conditioned rice falling in the glass puffing vessel was puffed by the hot air and
carried up by the air stream and got collected separately. The samples were
collected and graded and product was analyzed for quality parameters. The time
taken for puffing and the weight of output were noted for analysis.
3.9.3 Method for preparing puffed rice
Paddy
Soak overnight in just boiled water
Steaming (30-40 min)
Drying (3-4 hr sun drying, 2-3 days shade drying )
Parboiled paddy
Milling
Milled parboiled rice
Mixed with salt solution (2 % salt solution)
Pre-heat in iron pan (90-100 0C, 10-15 min)
Tempering (10 min)
Feed into a continuous fluidized bed rice puffing machine
Puffed rice
Fig. 3.12 Process flow chart for preparation of puffed rice
Fig. 3.13: Salt treated parboiled rice Fig. 3.14: Pre- heating of rice
Fig. 3.15: Continuous fluidized bed rice puffing machine
Fig. 3.16: Puffed rice in bucket
3.10 Pre Treatments for Puffed Rice
3.10.1 Conditioning and preheating of parboiled milled rice
Salt was added to the parboiled milled rice sample in the form of saturated
solution and the mixture was thoroughly mixed before giving heat treatment for
drying to the optimum moisture content required for puffing.
Table 3.1: Treatments for standardization of puffing temperature for puffed rice
Variety Moisture content (wb %) Puffing temperature
(0C) Adding 2% salt
solution
After 15 min. pre-heat
treatment
Mahamaya 19.73 13.89 270, 290, 310
IGKV R2 19.58 14.37 270, 290, 310
Barhasal 19.51 14.03 270, 290, 310
3.11 Physical Properties of Puffed Rice
3.11.1 Bulk density
Bulk density was determined by filling a measuring cylinder of 150 ml with
puffed rice by pouring it from a certain height, striking off the top level and then
weighing the contents on a balance. The ratio of a weight of the sample and
volume occupied by it is expressed as the bulk density, g/ml.
3.11.2 Puffing yield
Un-puffed and puffed rice from the sample after puffing were separated by
hand picking and weighed. Puffing yield was determined considering the
proportion of puffed grains in the sample (Maisont and Narkrugsa, 2009). The
puffed yield of the rice was expressed as a weight percentage.
3.11.3 Volume expansion ratio
The volume of the puffed rice was determined by the method of
Simsrisakul (1991), with some modifications. Puffed rice was placed in a beaker
with known volume. The remaining space in the beaker was filled with black
sesame of known volume. The volume of puffed rice was calculated by subtracting
the volume of black sesame from the beaker volume. Expansion volume was
calculated using Equation
3.11.4 Length expansion and width expansion
The length and width of the unpuffed and puffed rice were also measured
manually by a vernier caliper (Mitutoyo, Japan; precision). All the dimensions
were measured in millimeter unit. The measurement was made on ten randomly
drawn grains from the test samples of each variety. For calculation of length and
width expansion, the average of all ten measured grains was taken. Length
expansion and width expansion were expressed using the following formulae:
Where,
Li and Wi is the initial length and width of unpuffed rice samples
Lf and Wf is the final length and width of puffed rice samples
3.12 Chemical Methods
3.12.1 Moisture content
The moisture content of the sample was determined by standard air- oven
method (Ranganna, 1995). A test sample of 5 g was kept for 24 hours in hot air
electric oven maintained at 105°C. After 24 h the sample was drawn from the oven
and placed in desiccators for cooling to ambient temperature. After cooling the
weight of the sample was taken precisely. The loss in weight was determined and
moisture content was calculated using the following expression:
Where,
W1 = Initial weight of wet material sample (g),
W2 = Final weight of dried sample (g).
3.12.2 Protein content
Nitrogen (N2,%) of brown rice samples was estimated by using auto
Kjeldahl equipment (Kel Plus, Pelican System, India). Digestion of brown rice (0.5
g sample size) was carried out in the auto Kjeldahl equipment at 420 °C for 2 h.
The digested sample so obtained was distilled with 40 % NaOH and 4 % boric
acid. The vapor of ammonia obtained after distillation was collected in boric acid
(distillation time approximately 9 min) and then titrated against 0.05 N sulfamic
acid. The percentage of N2 of brown rice samples was calculated using the
following equation (Ranganna 1986).
Where,
14.01 is atomic weight of nitrogen,
SR = titrate reading of the sample (ml),
BR = titrate reading of the blank sample (ml),
Ws = weight of the sample (g).
Then, protein content was estimated by using the following expression (Juliano
1985):
3.12.3 Fat content
Crude fat was determined by using the Soxhlet apparatus, (AACC, 1976).
Oven dry beaker and sample at 100˚C for half hrs. Keep them in dessicator to
avoid moisture content gain from the atmosphere. Weight the beaker and note the
reading as initial weight. Carefully weight 5 g of puffed, flaked rice flour and keep
in cellulose thimble. The thimble was then placed in a soxhlet apparatus and
extracted with petroleum ether (80ml) for 2 h at 90˚C. The ether was then removed
and the flask with the residue dried in an oven at 105°C for 30 min., cooled in a
desiccator and weighed. The oil percentage was calculated using the formula:
Fig. 3.17: Fat content determination in socs plus unit
3.12.4 Ash content
Ash content was determined according to AACC (1976) procedure. 1g of
sample was taken in a silica crucible and weighed. It was made to ash in a muffle
furnace at 600°C for 3 to 4 hours. The crucible was cooled in the desiccators and
weighed, and the value for ash content was calculated by using the following
expression:
Ash content (%) =
3.12.5 Starch content
3.12.5.1 Principle
Starch is an important polysaccharide. Starch, which is composed of
several glucose molecules, is a mixture of two types of components namely
amylose and amylopectin. Starch is hydrolysed into simple sugars by dilute acids
and the quantity of simple sugars is measured colorimetrically. Starch content of
rice was determined by the anthron method. ). In this method starch is hydrolyzed
in hot acidic medium to glucose and dehydrated to hydroxymethylfurfural. This
compound forms a green coloured product with anthrone.
3.12.5.2 Procedure
A 500 mg sample of ground powder of each grain variety was weighed and
kept in a centrifuge tube and homogenised the sample in hot 80% ethanol to
remove sugars. Centrifuged at 6000 rpm for 10 min at 250C and retained residue.
Washing the residue repeatedly with hot 80% ethanol till the washing did not give
the colour with anthrone reagent. In dried sample of residue 5.0 mL of distilled
water and 6.5 mL of 52% perchloric acid were added and centrifuged at 6000 rpm
for 10 min at 250C and supernatant was saved. the Centrifuge of the sample was
repeated with perchloric acid and distilled water and supernatant were saved and
diluted sample by volume makeup with 100 mL distilled water. After pipette out
0.2 mL of supernatant and make up the volume to 1 mL with distilled water in each
tube 4 mL of anthrone reagent was added carefully and also 4 mL anthrone was
added in standard solution prepared by taking 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 and 1 mL of
working standard of glucose with makeup 1 mL distilled water solution. Heated up
8 min in boiling water bath and cooled down rapidly and was read the intensity of
green to dark green colour at 630 nm.
Fig. 3.18: Standard graph of glucose solution using anthrone reagent
3.12.5.3 Calculation
The glucose content in the sample was calculated using the standard graph.
Multiply the value by a factor 0.9 to arrive at the starch content.
0.097 0.138
0.269 0.409
0.422 0.469
0.533 0.59
0.711
0.898
y = 0.8027x + 0.0121
R² = 0.9616
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Abso
rban
ce a
t 630 n
m
Concentration of glucose (µg/ml)
3.12.6 Amylose content
3.12.6.1 Principle
Starch is composed of two components, namely amylose and amylopectin.
Amylose is a linear or non-branched polymer of glucose. The glucose units are
joined by α-1-4 glucosidic linkages. Amylose exists in coiled form and each coil
contains six glucose residues. The amylose content of starches usually ranges from
15 to 35%. High amylose content rice shows high volume expansion (not
necessarily elongation) and high degree of flakiness. The iodine is adsorbed within
the helical coils of amylose to produce a blue-coloured complex which is measured
colorimetrically.
3.12.6.2 Procedure
A 100 mg of powdered sample of each grain variety was weighed and put
into a conical flask and 1 mL distilled ethanol and 10 ml of 1 N NaOH were added.
Then the sample was heated in boiling water bath for 10 minutes. 100 ml volume
was made up by adding distilled water. 2.5 ml of the extract was taken then 20 ml
distilled water and 3 drops of phenolphthalein were added. HCl solution was added
drop by drop until the pink colour just disappeared. After that 1 ml iodine reagent
(IKI solution) was added and 50 ml volume was made up by adding distilled water
then the colour of solution was read at 590 nm. The reference solution was
prepared by diluting 1 ml iodine reagent into 50 ml distilled water. A standard
graph of amylose content was developed by taking the colour of standard amylose
solution at different concentration 0.1,0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, and 1 ml
at 590 nm.
3.12.6.3 Calculation
Absorbance corresponds of the test solution using equation obtained from
standard graph amylose percent was calculated.
3.12.7 Amylopectin content
The amount of amylopectin is obtained by subtracting the amylose content
from that of starch.
Fig. 3.19 Standard graph of amylose solution using anthrone reagent
3.12.8 Gel Consistency
Gel consistency measures the tendency of the cooked rice to harden on
cooling. Gel consistency is determined by heating a small quantity of rice in a
dilute alkali. This test differentiates the consistency of cold 5.0% milled rice paste.
Within the same amylose group, varieties with a softer gel consistency are
preferred, and the cooked rice has a higher degree of tenderness.
Harder gel consistency is associated with harder cooked rice and this
feature is particularly evident in high-amylose rice. Hard cooked rice also tend to
be less sticky
A 200 mg sample of ground powder of each rice grain variety was weighed
and put into a test tube. 200 µL of 95% ethanol containing 0.025% thymol blue
were added to each tube. The tubes were shaken well by stirring in a Vortex Genie,
2 mL of 0.2 N KOH was then added, and the tubes stirred again. The test tubes
were covered with foil, placed in a boiling water bath for 8 minutes; removed &
kept at room temperature for 5 minutes & finally transferred to an ice water bath
for 20 minutes. After this treatment, the tubes were placed horizontally on a graph
paper for 1 hr for measuring the gel length from the bottom of the tube to the end
of the gel in millimetres.
y = 0.0094x + 0.0866
R² = 0.9925
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0 10 20 30 40
abso
rban
ce a
t 590 n
m
amylose concentration (%)
Table 3.2: Classification of gel consistency
Classification Length of gel (mm)
Hard 27-35
Medium Hard 36-40
Medium 41-60
Soft 61-100
3.12.9 Gelatinization temperature or alkali dispersion test
The time required for cooking is determined by gelatinization temperature.
Environmental conditions, such as temperature during ripening, influence
gelatinization temperature. A high ambient temperature during development
results in starch with a higher temperature.
Gelatinization temperature is estimated by the extent of alkali spreading
and clearing of milled rice soaked in 1.7% KOH at room temperature or at 39oC
for 23 hours (Little et al, 1958). The degree of spreading is measured using a
seven-point scale as follows:
Table 3.3: Spreading values on 7 point scale
Scale Spreading value
1 grain not affected
2 grain swollen,
3 grain swollen, collar incomplete and narrow,
4 grain swollen, collar complete and wide,
5 grain split or segmented, collar complete and wide,
6 grain dispersed, merging with collar
7 grain completely dispersed and intermingled
Alkali spreading value corresponds to gelatinization temperature as follows:
1-2 high (74.5-80oc),
3, high intermediate,
4-5, intermediate (70-74oC), and
6-7, low (<70oC).
There is normally a distinct preference for rice with intermediate
gelatinization temperature.
3.13 Sensory Evaluation
For the evaluation of organoleptic properties of prepared value added
products a 9-Point hedonic Scale method was selected. A rating scale and test
procedure have been derived from the theoretical basis. The scale has nine points;
these points were given word descriptions from, “dislike extremely” to “like
extremely”. The length of scale was determined experimentally. Replicate testing
of products of varying hedonic value showed that responses were repeated more
consistently when scale has 9, rather than 5, 7 or 11 points. The scale points were
numbered from 1 to 9 and arithmetic mean of points checked is used as desired
index (David R. Peryam 1955).
The panels of semi- trained judges were gave value added products samples
for evaluation of organoleptic properties viz. appearance, colour, taste, flavor,
texture and overall acceptability. It will serve to panel at day of preparation. The
semi-trained panel of judges was selected among the professors and students for
the sensory evolution from Faculty of Agricultural Engineering, Raipur. The
format of Hedonic scale is given in Appendix D.
3.14 Statistical Analysis
All experiments were replicated and standard deviations have been
reported. Individual CRD and CRD factorial analysis test was carried out to
ascertain the variation between varieties for the respective attributes monitored.
CHAPTER – IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In this chapter the results and discussion are presented which were obtained
during the experimental work. This chapter deals with the study related to the
evaluation of some potential rice varieties of Chhattisgarh for puffing and flaking.
The paddy variety was obtained from Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding
and the evaluation of the paddy variety was studied in the SVCAET and RS, FAE
and Department of Plant Physiology, Bio-Chemistry, Medicinal & Aromatic Plants
IGKV, Raipur (C.G.).
4.1 Popularly Methods used for Producing Puffed Rice and Flaked
Rice Processing in the Chhattisgarh State
Chhattisgarh is agricultural chief land and due to the large production of
rice Chhattisgarh is known as the “rice of bowl” of India. Chhattisgarh used to
produce over seventy percent of the total paddy production in the state. The survey
was conducted to know about popularly used methods for producing puffed rice
and flaked rice in the state, visited some famous producing places of puffed and
flaked rice: Bilaspur, Raipur, Dhamtari and Rajnandgaon district of Chhattisgarh.
As per the survey conducted following methods are observed for puffed
and flaked rice processing.
1. Rice puffing by hot sand roasting – traditional method
2. Rice puffing by hot sand roasting – commercial method
3. Rice flaking by using dhenki unit –traditional method
4. Rice flaking by using edge runner machine –commercial method
4.1.1 Traditional method – rice puffing by hot sand roasting method
Hot sand roasting is a common puffing technique in the villages for
traditional puffing of rice and very popular in the region. All the puffing activities
were carried out manually viz., conditioning, roasting, puffing etc. A large work
was filled with sand and heated to high temperature. In processing by traditional
level they were procuring pre-gelatinized milled rice from the rice mill industries
as a raw material. In the process, after pre-heat treatment of raw material, sample
were exposed to hot sand into heating furnace, while temperature of sand was
about 250 0C and continuously stirred with a spatula until the samples puff from
the heat, the rice puffs in just a couple of seconds, then the sand and puffed rice
were separated through a wire mesh screen sieve.
Raw material
Pre- gelatinized milled rice (procured from rice mill)
Mixed with salt solution (as per taste)
Pre-heating by iron pot
Tempering
Sand roasting (about 250 0C)
Sieving (wire mesh screen)
Puffed rice
Fig. 4.1: Rice puffing by hot sand roasting – traditional method
Fig. 4.2: Rice samples exposed to hot sand and separation of puffed rice by sieve
4.1.2 Commercial method – rice puffing by hot sand roasting method
In commercially, hot sand roasting is a common and very popular puffing
technique for production of puffed rice in the region. The process of puffing from
pre-gelatinized rice sample to puffed rice was carried out by fully mechanically
setup with an elevator, screw conveyor, wooden chaff aspirator, sand roasting,
cleaning and separating unit etc. Normal preheating of raw material without adding
salt solution by the sand roasting then prepared salt solution was added
continuously into preheated sample conveyed for the sand roasting unit by a screw
conveyor. The sand roaster was heated by burning of wooden chaff powder
sending to the roasting unit by the aspirator. Puffing was done into cylinder of the
sand roasting unit and collected from cleaning and separating unit which had
separated sand particles from puffed rice and packing of puffed rice was
completed.
Pre-gelatinized milled rice (procured from rice mill industries)
Pre-heat treatment
Elevating sample
Conveyed by screw conveyor
Adding salt solution continuously (solution of 1 kg salt into 20 liter water)
Sand roasting (about 250 0C)
Puffed rice
Cleaning
Packaging
Fig. 4.3: Rice puffing by hot sand roasting method- commercial method
Fig. 4.4 : Elevating parboiled rice Fig. 4.5 : Screw conveying of rice
Fig. 4.6 : Addition salt solution Fig. 4.7 : Roasting for puffing
Fig. 4.8: Dhenki unit for making flaked rice by traditional method
4.1.3 Traditional method - rice flaking by using Dhenki unit
The traditional technique is shown in Fig.4.8 for making flaked rice is very
popular in the rural areas of this region, where the dhenki unit was installed at their
house for small scale purpose. In the process of making flaked rice by this method,
firstly raw material paddy samples was prepared which were obtained by soaking
paddy into small bucket in water overnight and next day drained water and after
which soaked paddy was heated by using small unit of sand roasting traditionally
and this prepared heated paddy were allowed in the dhenki unit for pressing
manually and obtained rice flakes with paddy husk which were separated by using
wooden separator manually.
4.1.4 Commercial method - rice flaking by using edge runner machine
In the commercial method, preparation of rice flakes from raw paddy
samples were carried out into small scale industries by consisting different steps
i.e. soaking, roasting, tempering and flattening of paddy etc. In this process, the
cleaned paddy after soaking in hot water for about 3-4 hr water was drained and
keep overnight to removing all the adhering moisture. This high moisture paddy
was taken into the roaster, which was heated by paddy husk externally. Time of
roasting of paddy tackled by appearing just a popping point reached of samples.
This hot paddy was passed through a sieve, where the sand was separated and hot
paddy obtained and this was tempered by keeping in a basket by covering with
paddy husk for about 5min. and flaked in an edge runner. These flakes were named
as edge runner flakes.
Fig. 10 : Roasting of soaked paddy Fig. 11 : Heated paddy at edge runner
Fig. 4.12 : Cleaned flaked rice Fig. 4.13 : Packaging of flaked rice
Raw material
Cleaned paddy
Soaking in hot water
Draining water
Keep overnight
Roasting
Heated paddy (tempered by covering with paddy husk)
Flaking into edge runner
Edge runner flakes
Fig. 4.9: Rice flaking by edge runner machine- commercial method
4.2 Physical Properties of Paddy
4.2.1 Moisture content
The initial moisture content of the paddy varieties Mahamaya, Barhasal and
IGKV R2 at the time of experiment was 11.39%, 10.70% and 12.10% wet basis.
The moisture content found can help to suggest the stability in storage of paddy.
4.2.2 Length, width and thickness
The longitudinal dimension or length (L) of paddy ranged from 8.41 to
10.45 mm with mean value as 9.517 ± 0.41 mm for mahamaya, 7.80 to 9.86 mm
with mean value 8.86 ± 0.46 mm for Barhasal. Similarly the length of IGKV R2
varied from 8.04 to 10.39 with mean value 9.49 ± 0.40 respectively. Among all
varieties the length of Mahamaya was found long and Barhasal was found short as
compared to long variety.
The width (W) of Mahamaya variety, ranged from 2.08 to 3.29 mm with
mean value as 2.946 ± 0.19 mm, 2.83 to 3.83 mm with mean value 3.32 ± 0.16 mm
was found in Barhasal. Similarly the width of IGKV R2 varied from 2.03 to 3.18
with mean value 2.42 ± 0.17 respectively. Among all varieties the width of
Barhasal variety found more as compared to other.
Thickness (T) of Mahamaya variety ranged from 1.85 to 2.93 with mean
value 2.171 ± 0.13 mm and the Barhasal variety varied from 1.48 to 2.65 mm with
mean value 2.24 ± 0.18 mm. Similarly thickness of IGKV R2 varied from 1.52 to
2.24 mm with mean 1.97 ± 0.11 mm, respectively. Among all varieties the
thickness of Barhasal was more as compared to other varieties.
4.2.3 Geometric mean diameter
The GMD of Mahamaya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 varieties was found to be
3.92 ± 0.11, 4.03 ± 0.17, 3.56 ± 0.13. Geometric mean diameter of paddy indicates
the central tendency. The GMD was more for Barhasal and Mahamaya varieties.
By increasing the moisture levels, the amount of GMD increased.
4.2.4 Sphericity
Sphericity of the Mahamaya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 varieties varied from
37.71 to 45.74 and 39.02 to 52.21, 34.48 to 42.42 with mean value 41.33 ± 1.58
and 45.57 ± 2.10 and 37.60 ± 1.51 respectively. The sphericity value was lower in
IGKV R2 variety than Barhasal and Mahamaya. The lower sphericity values
suggested that the paddy tend towards a cylindrical shape. The lower values of
sphericity generally indicate a likely difficulty in getting the paddy to roll than that
of peas like spheroid grains. They can, however, slide on their flat surfaces. This
tendency to either roll or slide should be necessary in the design of hoppers for
milling process.
4.2.5 Aspect ratio
Aspect ratio of Mahamaya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 varied from 22.95 to
36.92, 32.00 to 47.46 and 21.55 to 34.94 with mean 31.00 ± 2.33, 37.55 ± 2.57 and
25.588 ± 2.09 respectively. The value of aspect ratio was less in the IGKV R2
variety. Thus, the lower values of the aspect ratio generally indicate a likely
difficulty in getting the paddy to roll than that of peas like spheroid grains. They
can, however, slide on their flat surfaces.
4.2.6 Surface area
The surface area ranged from 38.83 to 53.56, 40.37 to 60.08, 32.15 to 45.56
with mean 48.51 ± 2.71, 51.15 ± 4.16, 39.93 ± 2.77 mm2 for Mahamaya, Barhasal
and IGKV R2 paddy variety respectively. The surface area is a relevant tool in
determining the shape of the seeds. This will actually be an indication of the way
the paddy will behave on oscillating surfaces during processing.
4.2.7 Bulk density and true density
The bulk density values lies between 0.694 to 0.728, 0.566 to 0.622 and
0.649 to 0.695 gm/ml with mean 0.716 ± 0.012, 0.585 ± 0.018 and 0.745 ± 0.031
gm/ml for the Mahamaya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 respectively. The bulk density
was lower in Barhasal and higher in IGKV R2 varieties.
The true density values lies within 1.002 to 1.254, 1.000 to 1.250, 1.000 to
1.250 g/ml. However, the mean value was 1.103 ± 0.128, 1.075 ± 0.120, 1.150 ±
0.129 g/ml. The value of true density indicates that, the paddy density is higher
than water, which is the important property in case of food grains during wet
cleaning, as paddy does not float on water.
4.2.8 Angle of repose
The angle of repose was 26.98 to 33.2, 27.47 to 32.62, 30.96 to 35.75 with
mean 31.23 ± 1.93, 29.56 ± 1.78, 33.54 ± 1.86. Angle of repose was high in IGKV
R2 paddy variety. This phenomenon is imperative in food grain processing,
particularly in the designing of hopper for milling equipment.
4.2.9 Coefficient of friction
The coefficient of friction shown in Table The co-efficient of static friction
was found 0.243 ± 0.0247 on plywood, 0.266 ± 0.0240 on glass and 0.397 ±
0.0136 on a mild steel, 0.434 ± 0.021 on a rubber for Mahamaya and values of
0.254 ± 0.0175 on plywood, 0.241 ± 0.0178 on glass and 0.422 ± 0.0179 on a mild
steel, 0.511 ± 0.0368 on a rubber for Barhasal paddy variety. Similarly values of
0.230 ± 0.0151 on plywood, 0.219 ± 0.023 on glass and 0.389 ± 0.023 on a mild
steel, 0.491 ± 0.033 on a rubber. This fact was expected because the milling
operation makes the grain surface smoother which agrees with Mohsenin, who
affirms that the friction and consequently its coefficient are affected mainly by the
nature and type of the surface in contact.
4.3 Milling Characteristics
4.3.1 Hulling and milling percentage
At the time of milling the moisture content of paddy was 10.70 to 12.10 %
(wb). The hulling and milling percentage of varieties are shown in Table 4.3 and. It
was observed that the hulling and milling percentage are more in Mahamaya
variety.
Table 4.3: Hulling and milling percentage
Variety Wt. of paddy
(g)
Moisture
content (% wb)
Hulling
Percentage (%)
Milling
Percentage (%)
Mahamaya 100 11.39 78.43 66.91
Barhasal 100 10.70 77.55 61.38
IGKV R2 100 12.10 74.66 58.95
Table 4.1 Some physical properties of different paddy varieties
Mean ± standard deviation values
Table 4.2 Static coefficients of friction of different paddy varieties on different
surfaces
Surface No. of
observation
Mahamaya Barhasal IGKV R2
Plywood 10 0.243±0.0247 0.254±0.0175 0.230±0.0151
Glass 10 0.266±0.0240 0.241±0.0178 0.219±0.0230
Mild steel 10 0.397±0.0136 0.422±0.0179 0.389±0.0230
Rubber 10 0.434±0.0210 0.511±0.0368 0.491±0.033
Mean ± standard deviation values
Fig. 4.14: Effect of moisture content on hulling and milling
Parameters No. of
observation
Mahamaya Barhasal IGKV R2
Length (mm) 100 9.51±0.41 8.86±0.46 9.49±0.40
Width (mm) 100 2.94±0.18 3.32±0.16 2.42±0.17
Thickness(mm) 100 2.17±0.13 2.24±0.18 1.97±0.11
GMD (mm) 100 3.92±0.11 4.03±0.17 4.03±0.17
Surface area (mm2) 100 48.512±2.71 51.15±4.16 39.93±2.77
Sphericity (%) 100 41.33±1.58 45.57±2.10 37.60±1.51
Bulk density
(gm/ml)
10 0.716±0.012 0.585±0.018 0.745±0.031
True density
(gm/ml)
10 1.103±0.128 1.075±0.120 1.15±0.129
Thousand wt. of
grains (gm)
3 31.7±0.20 28.2±1.65 31.4±0.264
Angle of repose
(Degrees)
10 31.231±1.93
4
29.567±1.782 33.547±1.868
0
20
40
60
80
Moisture (%) Hulling (%)
Milling (%)
Mahamaya
Barhasal
IGKV R2
4.4 Chemical Properties of Rice
4.4.1 Alkali spreading value and gel consistency
ASV, especially, is used as an inverse indicator of the gelatinisation
temperature (GT) of milled rice starch granules (Delwiche et al., 1996). The
importance of gelatinization temperature is for determining, the time required for
cooking milled rice. The differences in GT could be due to the environmental
conditions such as temperature during ripening. Gelatinization temperature directly
affects the physical properties of the starch granule, which in turn influences the
quality ratings of cooked rice. Rice with a high gelatinization temperature becomes
excessively soft and tends to disintegrate when overcooked. Under standard
cooking procedures, this type of rice tends to remain undercooked. It requires more
water and time to cook than those with low or intermediate gelatinization
temperature. Thus, gelatinization temperature correlates positively with the time
required to cook rice. High amylose is responsible for high gelatinization
temperature and low alkali spreading value (Mariotti, Fongaro, & Catenacci, 2010).
Gel consistency measures the tendency of the cooked rice to harden on
cooling. Varietal differences in gel consistency exist among varieties of similar
high amylose content (more than 25%). Alkali spreading value and gel consistency
of rice are shown in Table 4.4.
Table 4.4: Alkali spreading value and gel consistency of rice
Varieties Alkali
Spreading
Value
Classification Gelatinization
Temperature
(˚C)
Gel
Consistency
(mm)
Category
Mahamaya 6.33±0.57 High <70 ˚C 99.16±1.04 Soft
Barhasal 5.00±0 intermediate 70-74 ˚C 84.33±0.57 Soft
IGKV R2 4.33±0.57 intermediate 70-74 ˚C 95.00±0 Soft
Mean ± standard deviation values
4.4.2 Starch, amylose and amylopectin
The chemical properties of raw rice i.e. starch content, amylose content and
amylopectin content of three varieties of Mahamaya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 are
presented in Table 4.5. The starch content of the raw rice samples was found to
vary between 73.37 to 76.23 %, lower for Barhasal and higher for Mahamaya
variety, respectively. The amylose content of the raw rice samples was found to
vary between 20.18 to 25.29 %, lower for Barhasal and higher for Mahamaya
variety, respectively. Thus, the rice varieties tested were found to be intermediate
to high amylose type. The amylopectin content of the raw rice samples was found
to vary between 74.71 to 79.82 %, lower for Mahamaya and higher for Barhasal
variety, respectively. Starch molecules are comprised of amylose and amylopectin.
The amylose content of rice plays an important role in deciding the puffing
characteristics. Amylose is composed of linear chain of glucose molecules which
align themselves in the shear fields and thus are difficult to pull apart during the
extrusion process (Moraru & Kokini, 2003). Since high-amylose content rice
varieties are hard to shear, there is a greater chance that pressure will build up
during the thermal treatment. This perhaps resulted in a sudden expansion of the
endosperm, making it a highly preferred product from puffing compared to their
low amylose content counterparts. It has been observed that highly packed starch
molecules have a better ability to expand compared to the loosely packed chalky
grains. Singh, Sodhi, Kaur, and Saxena (2003) tested chalky grains for cooking and
puffing qualities and found that they had lower elongation ratio after cooking and
lower expansion ratio after puffing. Joshi et al. (2014) also observed a similar
trend.
Fig. 4.15: Starch, amylose and amylopectin content of rice varieties
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Starch
content (%) Amylose
content (%) Amylopectin
content (%)
Mahamaya
Barhasal
IGKV R2
Table 4.5: Chemical parameters of rice varieties
Varieties Starch (%) Amylose (%) Amylopectin (%)
Mahamaya 76.23±0.156 25.30±1.11 74.70±1.11
Barhasal 73.37±0.872 20.18±1.40 79.81±1.40
IGKV R2 74.88±0.318 24.55±0.18 75.44±1.40
Mean ± standard deviation values
4.5 Physical, Functional and Nutritional Properties of Flaked Rice
4.5.1 Moisture content
The moisture content of paddy varieties while processing into flaked rice
are shown in Table 4.6. Initially, paddy had around 11-12 % moisture. Overnight
soaked paddy at room temperature had around 30-34 % moisture, least was in
IGKV R2 variety. At the industrial level, paddy was aerated for 10-15 min, where
the moisture reduced by 5-8 %. This paddy is individually dropped in the roaster,
where the paddy moved for 23-25 seconds and when the paddy came out, the
moisture content decreased and it varied from 18 to 19 %. This paddy was
tempered in that hot condition for about 10 minutes by covering with husk in small
baskets followed by flaking in an edge runner flakes machine. These flakes were
further shade dried at room temperature, where the moisture content dropped down
to 6-8 %. Overall a decreasing trend in moisture content was observed.
Fig. 4.16: Moisture Content during processing of flaked rice
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Paddy Soaked
paddy Roasted
paddy Flaked
rice
Mahamaya
Barhasal
IGKV R2
Table 4.6: Moisture content of paddy varieties while processing into flaked rice
Varieties Paddy (%) Soaked paddy
(24 hr) (%)
Roasted paddy
(%)
Flaked rice
(%)
Mahamaya 11.83±0.64 34.16±0.49 19.71±0.56 6.75±0.55
Barhasal 10.76±0.37 32.83±0.62 18.64±0.76 7.12±0.26
IGKV R2 12.15±0.72 30.85±0.09 17.84±0.58 6.74±1.66
4.5.2 Flaking yield
The flaking yield of each paddy varieties is shown in Table 4.7. The flaking
process yielded a recovery of flaked rice range from 60.50 % to 64.60 %
respectively. Flaking yield was found to be 64.60 % for Mahamaya, 60.10 % for
Barhasal and 60.10 % for IGKV R2 varieties respectively which were close to
milling percentage of each of variety. Milling percentage of each paddy varieties
were shown in Table 4.3. In IGKV R2 variety flaking yield was found to be
increased as compared to milling percentage of variety. The husk and bran formed
during the flaking process were found to be around 29.27%. The recovery
percentage of flaking is close to rice milling and lower recovery losses as
compared to milling make it an effective processing parameter for processing
paddy into a value added product (Kumar et. al 2016).
Table 4.7 Recovery of flaked rice after processing
Paddy
Variety
Wt. of paddy
(kg)
Wt. of cleaned flaked rice
(kg)
Flaking yield
(%)
Mahmaya 20 12.92 64.60
Barhasal 20 12.82 64.10
IGKV R2 20 12.10 60.50
Fig. 4.17: Flaking yield of varieties
42 46 50 54 58 62 66 70
Mahamaya Barhasal IGKV R2
Flaking Yeild (%)
4.5.3 Physical properties of flaked rice
The change in dimensional properties at different levels of processing is
eminent as shown in Table 4.8 and Appendix A (Table 1f, 1g & 1h) 7.70 to 9.95
mm and the width (W), ranged from 2.71 to 3.67 mm and thickness (T) ranged
from 0.94 to 1.56 mm for Mahamaya variety. Similarly, for Barhasal, length,
width, thickness ranged from 7.45 to 10.62, 3.20 to 4.16, 0.80 to 1.37 mm and for
IGKV R2 8.01 to 10.5, 2.58 to 3.72, 0.71 to 1.15 mm. For thin size flaked rice
length, width, thickness varied from 9.90 to 16.48, 3.66 to 5.75, 0.55 to1.14 mm
for Mahamaya variety. For Barhasal and IGKV R2, 9.8 to 14.18, 3.80 to 7.45, 0.48
to 1.09 mm and 11.82 to 16.71, 3.79 to 5.62, 0.43 to 0.95 mm respectively. Rice
grain flattened during double flaking process increased its length at the expense of
thickness and yielded a product with higher major dimensions and lower minor
dimension.
The bulk density (BD) and true density (TD) of the flaked rice samples of
the varieties varied between 0.649 to 0.701 gm/ml and 1.658 to 1.660 gm/ml for
thick size and varied between 0.338 to 0.451 gm/ml and 1.52 to 1.66 gm/ml for
thin size respectively Appendix A (Table 1i). Among the different varieties tested,
bulk density of Mahamaya variety was found higher 0.701 gm/ml for thick size
flaked rice and 0.451 gm/ml for thin size flaked rice and found lower 0.649 gm/ml
for thick size and 0.338 gm/ml for thin size flaked rice of IGKV R2 variety with
significant differences of thick and thin size flaked rice respectively. The true
density among different varieties of the both thick and thin size flaked rice were
not found significant differences.
4.5.4 Functional properties of flaked rice
The water absorption index (WAI), water solubility index (WSI), swelling power
(SP) and water uptake (WU) of thick and thin size flaked rice among different
varieties were not found significant differences shown in Table 4.9. The WAI
mean value ranged from 4.868 to 4.932 for Mahamaya and IGKV R2 variety of
thick size and from 7.048 to 6.818 for IGKV R2 and Mahamaya variety of thin size
flaked rice respectively. The WSI mean value ranged from 0.895 to 1.025 for
IGKV R2 and Mahamaya variety of thick size and from 0.663 to 0.702 for
Mahamaya and IGKV R2 variety of thin size flaked rice respectively. The SP
Table 4.8: Physical properties of flaked rice of different varieties
Mean ± standard deviation values
Table 4.9 Functional properties of different varieties of flaked rice
Parameters Number
of
observation
Mahamaya Barhasal IGKV R2
Thick size Thin size Thick size Thin size Thick size Thin size
WAI 3 4.868 6.818 4.932 6.880 4.950 7.048
WSI 3 1.025 0.663 1.002 0.645 0.895 0.702
SP 3 4.918 6.863 4.983 6.925 4.980 7.085
WU 3 400.50 644.50 420.75 637.00 441.25 643.25
Parameters No. of
observation
Mahamaya Barhasal IGKV R2
Thick size Thin size Thick size Thin size Thick size Thin size
Length (mm) 50
8.675±0.610 12.271±0.619 7.45±0.571 9.80±1.140 8.01±0.619 11.82±1.40
Width (mm)
50 3.193±0.241 4.326±0.475 3.2 ± 0.265 3.80±0.783 2.58±0.295 3.79±0.525
Thickness (mm) 50 1.324±0.154 0.771±0.120 0.8±0.120 0.48±0.118 0.71±0.152 0.43±0.128
Bulk Density (g/ml) 10 0.701±0.0237 0.451±0.0264 0.678±0.0245 0.428±0.0189 0.649±0.0169 0.338±0.0124
True Density (g/ml) 5 1.658±0.0109 1.52±0.2859 1.66±2.48 E-16 1.66±2.48 E-16 1.66±2.48 E-16 1.66±2.48 E-16
mean value ranged from 4.918 to 4.983 for Mahamaya and Barhasal variety
of thick size and ranged from 6.863 to 7.085 for Mahamaya and IGKV R2 variety
of thin size flaked rice respectively. The water uptake mean value ranged from
400.50 to 441.25 for Mahamaya and IGKV R2 variety of thick size and ranged
from 637.00 to 644.50 for Barhasal and Mahamaya variety of thin size flaked rice
respectively. The WAI and WSI of flaked rice increased significantly (p < 0.05)
during the processing of paddy. The WAI of roasted, thick flaked rice and extra
thin flaked rice was found to be greater than the brown rice. Processing of paddy
(roasting and flaking) to extra thin flaked rice resulted in physicochemical changes
of grains. Roasting at high temperature resulted in decreasing moisture content of
grains that led to the dry heat gelatinization. Both roasting and flaking resulted in
the damage of some starch granules leading to their enhanced water absorption
capacity. The swelling power of edge runner flakes at various temperatures, were
almost same for IR-64, BPT 5204 and jyothi flakes, except MTU 1001, where the
swelling power was slightly high. In the swelling power pattern of the edge runner
followed by roller pass flakes, where gradual increase in the values were observed
with the increase in cooking temperature. The solubility of flakes at lower
temperature was almost same (Deepa and Singh, 2011).
4.5.5 Effect of varietal differences on proximate analysis of rice and flaked
rice
The results of proximate composition of rice and flaked rice prepared with
two different sizes i.e. thick flakes and thin flakes of different varieties namely
Mahamaya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 are shown in Table 4.10.
The moisture content was higher in rice as compared to flaked rice. The
moisture content of rice ranges between 11.92 to 12.28 % of different varieties and
the moisture content of flaked rice of thick size ranges between 6.55 to 7.42 % and
ranges between 6.63 to 7.70 % for thin size flaked rice respectively.
The fat content of rice and thin size flaked rice were found to be
significant results and thick size flaked rice was found to be non-significant of
different varieties namely Mahamaya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 respectively.
Table 4.10 Individual CRD analysis for proximate composition of rice and flaked rice
Parameters M.C. (%) Fat (%) Protein (%) Total Ash (%)
Mahamaya Rice 12.288±0.05 1.446± 0.004 6.709±0.117 0.467±0.033
TSF1 6.555±0.27 1.085 ±0.067 5.658± 0.025 2.553±0.195
TSF2 6.630±0.02 1.035±0.046 5.591±0.002 0.588±0
Barhasal Rice 11.925±0.078 0.990±0 8.766±0.234 0.590±0.077
TSF1 7.420±0.155 0.980±0 8.517±0.021 3.996±0.431
TSF2 7.700±0.155 0.965±0.004 8.184±0.032 1.903±0.082
IGKV R2 Rice 12.240±0.062 0.985±.003 7.286±0.059 0.446±0.001
TSF1 6.75±0.028 0.790±0 7.264±0.006 3.888±2.112
TSF2 6.785±0.049 0.770±0.007 7.236±0.113 0.927±0.063
Mean ± standard deviation values
Moisture content (%) Fat (%) Protein (%) Ash (%)
Rice TSF1 TSF2 Rice TSF1 TSF2 Rice TSF1 TSF2 Rice TSF1 TSF2
CV (%) 0.51 2.66 1.36 0.044 8.15 5.83 2..04 0.27 0.97 9.64 35.92 5.24
F Cal 19.721*
12.23**
73.10**
7627.54**
7.432ns
13.006 *
94.002**
10919.682**
747.306**
5.224ns
0.827ns
261.714**
S Em 0.0442 0.1298 0.0676 0.0035 0.0548 0.0381 0.1094 0.0137 0.0480 0.0342 0.8836 0.0422
CD (5%) 0.20 0.58 0.30 0.02 -
0.17 0.49 0.06 0.22 - - 0.19
** Significant at 1% level,*Significant at 5% level, NS-Non Significant
R = Rice sample, TSF1 = Thick size flaked rice, TSF2 = Thin size flaked rice
The fat content in rice ranges from 0.985 to 1.446 % of varieties and for thick size
flaked rice was ranged from 0.79 to 1.08 % and 0.77 to 1.03 % for thin size flaked
rice of varieties. The fat content was found to be higher for Mahamaya and found
to be lower for IGKV R2 variety of rice and thin size flaked rice.
The protein content of rice and thick and thin size flaked rice were found to
be significant results of different varieties namely Mahamaya, Barhasal and IGKV
R2 respectively. The protein content in rice ranges from 6.70 to 8.76 % of varieties
and for thick size flaked rice ranges from 5.65 to 8.51 % and 5.59 to 8.18 for thin
size flaked rice of varieties. The protein content was found to be higher for
Barhasal and found to be lower for IGKV R2 variety of rice and thick and thin size
flaked rice respectively.
Total ash content of rice and thick size flaked rice were not found to be
significant results of varieties respectively and for thin size flaked rice value ranges
from 0.58 to 0.927 % of varieties namely Mahamaya and IGKV R2 respectively.
While processing into flaked rice from paddy it was found that moisture
content, fat content, protein content was decreases but the ash content was
increases (Kumar et. al. 2016).
4.6 Puffing and Nutritional Properties of Puffed Rice
4.6.1 Moisture content
The moisture content of raw Mahamaya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 was
between 10.70 to 12.10 % (wb) that increased to 41.49 %, 44.62 %, and 40.17 %
respectively on soaking and 34.13 %, 34.89 %, and 34.73 % respectively on
steaming that indicate sufficient hydration of the rice endosperms. Parboiling
significantly reduce the moisture content of the paddy samples (Table 4.11 and
Appendix). It was observed that temperature severity played the crucial role in
moisture content reduction than processing time.
Table 4.11 Moisture content of the paddy varieties while processing into parboiled
samples
Varieties Paddy
(% wb)
Soaked paddy
(% wb)
Steamed
paddy (% wb)
Parboiled
paddy (% wb)
Mahamaya 11.50 41.49 34.13 14.07
Barhasal 10.7 44.62 34.89 16.77
IGKV R2 12.1 40.17 34.73 13.61
Mean values of three determinants
Fig. 4.18: Moisture content while processing of parboiled rice
4.6.2 Puffing characteristics of parboiled milled rice
Puffing characteristics of pre-gelatinized (parboiled) Mahamaya, Barhasal
and IGKV R2 rice, for puffing temperature (270 0C, 290
0C and 310
0C ) set in a
continuous fludized bed puffing machine for sample size of 50 g parboiled milled
rice, pre-conditioned to 14% (wb) moisture level with 2 % salt solution was
studied. The application of high-temperature short time (HTST) treatment
invariably requires a heat transfer media and the temperature of heat transfer media
is one of the key factors that influences the expansion ratio. Puffing temperature
set in a continuous fluidized bed puffing machine gives considerable variations in
the yield as well as expansion ratio were noticed.
4.6.2.1 Expansion properties of rice varieties
The expansion properties of rice i.e. length expansion ratio (LER), breadth
wise expansion ratio (BER) and volume expansion ratio of puffed rice (VER) of
three varieties with different puffing temperature (270, 290 and 310 0C) are
presented in Table 4.12 and Appendix A ( Table 1j, 1k & 1l). The degree of
puffing expansion is said to be affected by the conditions of thermal treatments, the
rice variety i.e. mainly its amylose content and parboiling conditions
(Chinnaswamy and Bhattacharya, 1983a, 1983b). The LER, BER and VER of the
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Paddy Soaked
paddy Steamed
paddy Parboiled
paddy
Mahamaya
Barhasal
IGKV R2
puffed rice were found to vary significantly between samples from 1.255 to 1.798,
1.83 to 2.258 and 3.39 to 7.629 respectively with the highest VER for the variety,
Mahamaya (7.629), followed by IGKV R2 (6.698) and Barhasal (6.573) at 310 0C
puffing temperature. Also for the length expansion ratio of puffed rice, the highest
LER for the variety, Mahamaya (1.798) at 310 0C puffing temperature, followed by
IGKV R2 (1.686) at 290 0C puffing temperature. Similarly for the breadthwise
expansion ratio of puffed rice, the highest BER for the variety, IGKV R2 (2.258) at
310 0C puffing temperature, followed by Mahamaya (2.210) and Barhasal (2.056)
at 310 0C puffing temperature. In puffing operation, the volume of puffing is
depends on the bulk density of rice, higher the bulk density results in higher
expansion ratio (Basavaraj et. al 2015). Expansion ratio is one of the crucial
parameters in determining the cereal product quality in case of extruded products.
Expansion of cereal product has been reported to decrease with increasing amount
of protein (Faubion et al., 1982) or lipid (Mercier et al., 1980) and increase with
increasing amount of starch and proportion of amylopectin to amylose in starch.
Table 4.12 Effect of varietal difference on puffing characteristics with different
puffing temperature
Rice varieties Puffing
Temperature
(0C)
Expansion characteristics
LER BER VER
Mahamaya 270 1.479±0.161 2.157±0.134 5.123±0.045
290 1.686±0.084 2.210±0.167 5.548±0.079
310 1.798±0.085 2.146±0.087 7.629±0.084
Barhasal 270 1.255±0.057 1.830±0.099 3.390±0.029
290 1.406±0.079 1.884±0.091 4.401±0.018
310 1.580±0.108 2.056±0.179 6.573±0.032
IGKV R2 270 1.681±0.094 2.073±0.096 5.619±0.127
290 1.686±0.148 2.180±0.162 6.126±0.082
310 1.662±0.107 2.258±0.170 6.698±0.101
Mean ± Standard deviation values
Table 4.13 Factorial CRD analysis for varietal difference on puffing characteristics with different puffing temperature
Length Expansion Ratio (LER)
Sources DF F Cal S Em CD (5%)
Treatment 8 25.32893 ** 0.03 0.10
V 2 55.28121 ** 0.02 0.06
T 2 28.65324 ** 0.02 0.06
VT 4 8.69065 ** 0.03 0.10
Error 81
Breadthwise Expansion Ratio (BER)
Sources DF F Cal S Em CD (5%)
Treatment 8 11.37817 ** 0.04 0.12
V 2 32.76072 ** 0.02 0.07
T 2 7.16418 ** 0.02 0.07
VT 4 2.79389 * 0.04 0.12
Error 81
Volume Expansion Ratio (VER)
Sources DF F Cal S Em CD (5%)
Treatment 8 859.34748 ** 0.04 0.13
V 2 941.44314 ** 0.03 0.07
T 2 2133.71726 ** 0.03 0.07
VT 4 181.11476 ** 0.04 0.13
Error 18
V = Paddy Verieties
T = Puffing temperature
** Significant
NS Non Significant
4.6.2.2 Bulk density of puffed rice
The bulk density of the puffed rice samples of the varieties are shown in
Table 4.14. The bulk density of the puffed rice samples of the varieties were found
to vary significantly at different puffing temperature ranges with mean value 81.7
gm/L to 157.5 gm/L for 310 0C and 290
0C puffing temperature respectively. The
higher bulk density was found at 270 0C puffing temperature and lower was found
at 310 0C puffing temperature with the lowest value of variety of Mahamaya (81.7
gm/L) followed by IGKV R2 (97.3) and Barhasal (97.6) respectively.
Table 4.14 Bulk density of puffed rice at different puffing temperature
Temperature (0C) Mahamaya (gm/L) Barhasal (gm/L) IGKV R2 (gm/L)
270 139.9±0.0024 157.5±0.0001 156.7±0.0001
290 111.6±0.0002 128.7±0.0001 128±0.0002
310 81.7±0.0013 97.6±0.0021 97.3±0.0017
Fig. 4.19: Effect of temperature on bulk density of varieties
4.6.2.3 Puffing yield of varieties
Puffing yield of the rice at different puffing temperature of the varieties are
shown in Table 4.15 and Appendix A (Table 1m). The puffing yield of rice at
different puffing temperature were found to vary with mean values ranged from
67.21 to 79.56 % at 270 0C and 310
0C puffing temperature respectively. The
higher puffing yield were found at 310 0C puffing temperature and lower puffing
yield at 270 0C with the higher mean values of Mahamaya (79.56 %) and IGKV R2
60
65
70
75
80
270 290
310
Mahamaya
Barhasal
IGKV R2
(78.426 %) with values of similar range and followed by Barhasal (74.42 %)
respectively.
Table 4.15 Puffing yield of rice varieties at different puffing temperature
Temperature (0C) Mahamaya (%) Barhasal (%) IGKV R2 (%)
270 70.89±0.036 67.21±0.213 68.31±0.255
290 75.94±0.069 72.79±0.055 74.43±0.173
310 79.56±0.302 74.43±.230 78.42±0.276
Mean ± standard deviation values
Fig. 4.20: Puffed rice of Barhasal at 2700C, 290
0C and 310
0C
Fig. 4.21: Puffed rice of IGKV R2 at 2700C, 290
0C and 310
0C
Fig. 4.22: Puffed rice of Mahamaya at 2700C, 290
0C and 310
0C
4.6.3 Proximate analysis of rice varieties and puffed rice
The results of proximate composition of raw and puffed rice prepared with
different temperature on 270 0C, 290
0C and 310
0C of the paddy varieties namely
Mahamya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 are shown in Table 4.14 and Appendix.
Moisture content was higher in raw rice as compared to puffed rice.
Moisture content is an important quality attribute of puffed rice which affects its
texture as it is highly hygroscopic in nature. Puffed rice is more preferred for its
crispiness in snacks and to retain it, it needs to be packed and stored in airtight
containers or in polypropylene bags which have the capacity to maintain product
moisture content below 3.5% (Kamaraddii and Prakash 2015). The moisture
content of raw rice ranges from 11.92 to 12.28 %, lower for Barhasal and higher
for Mahamaya raw rice respectively. The moisture content of puffed rice prepared
at puffing temperature of 270 0C, 290
0C and 310
0C ranges from 6.49 to 8.23 %,
lower for Mahamaya and higher Barhasal, 6.53 to 8.49 % for lower IGKV2 and
higher Barhasal and 5.77 to 7.78 % for lower mahamaya and higher Barhasal
respectively.
Fat content of rice and puffed rice prepared at puffing temperature of 270
0C, 290
0C and 310
0C found to be non significant results among all paddy varieties
of the Mamahaya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 respectively. The fat content in rice
ranges from 0.985 to 1.446, lower for the IGKV R2 and higher for the Mahamaya
respectively. The fat content of puffed rice prepared at puffing temperature of 270
0C, 290
0C and 310
0C ranges from 0.734 to 0.978, 0.770 to 0.975 and 0.775 to
0.985, lower for the IGKV R2 variety of puffed rice and found higher for the
Mahamya variety of puffed rice respectively.
Protein content of rice and puffed rice prepared at puffing temperature of
270 0C, 290
0C and 310
0C found to be significant results among all paddy varieties
of the Mahamaya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 respectively. The protein content in rice
ranges from 6.70 to 8.76, lower for the Mahamaya and higher for the Barhasal
respectively. The protein content of puffed rice prepared at puffing temperature of
270 0C, 290
0C and 310
0C ranges from 6.03 to 8.37, 6.45 to 8.47 and 6.23 to 8.21,
lower for the Mahamaya variety of puffed rice and found higher for the Barhasal
variety of puffed rice respectively. This property is of importance as higher protein
content decreases the puffing output of the cereal (Chandrasekhar &
Chattopadhyay, 1991) and rice variety with the low protein content would have
better puffing yield.
Total ash content of rice found to be non-significant results and puffed rice
prepared at puffing temperature of 270 0C and 290
0C found to be a significant
difference and also at 310 0C found to be a non-significant difference among all
paddy varieties of the Mahamya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 respectively. Total ash
content in rice ranges from 0.446 to 0.590, lower for the IGKV R2 and higher for
the Barhasal respectively. Total ash content of puffed rice prepared at puffing
temperature of 270 0C, 290
0C and 310
0C ranges from 3.41 to 4.65, 3.90 to 4.63
and 3.15 to 4.18, lower for the Mahamya and higher for the IGKV R2 respectively.
The ash content of expanded rice samples was much higher than what is generally
seen for milled rice, the reason being processing in sand medium in iron pans,
which could contribute towards contaminant minerals. The ash content of milled
and parboiled rice as reported by Oghbaei and Prakash (2010) was 0.32 and 0.55%,
respectively. Khatoon and Prakash (2006) reported a range of 0.4–0.6% of ash
content in four varieties of milled rice samples. The process of puffing affected the
mineral contents of the rice. As process of puffing involves parboiling, the
nutrients in the outer bran imbibe into central core of the grain and get fixed during
retrogradation during drying. During the puffing process, parboiled rice was
roasted with hot sand in an iron pan which can induce metal contamination of
product. Heinemann et al. (2005) reported that parboiled milled rice had 18%
higher ash in comparison with milled rice.
Table 4.16 Effect of varietal differences with different puffing temperature on
proximate analysis of rice and puffed rice
Parameters Rice Puffed rice
270 0C 290
0C 310
0C
Mahamaya
MC (%) 12.28±0.051 6.49±0.057 6.80±0.028 5.77±0.134
Fat (%) 1.44±0.002 0.97±0.001 0.97±0.004 0.98±0.004
Protein (%) 6.70±0.117 6.03±0.116 6.45±0.059 6.23±0.058
Total ash (%) 0.46±0.033 3.41±0.070 3.90±0.111 3.15±0.163
Barhasal
MC (%) 11.92±0.078 8.23±0.035 8.49±0.099 7.78±0.091
Fat (%) 0.99±0 0.93±0.003 0.95±0.004 0.97±0
Protein (%) 8.76±0.234 8.37±0.059 8.47±0.058 8.21±0.059
Total ash (%) 0.59±0.077 3.47±0.170 3.98±0.550 3.90±0.111
IGKV R2
MC (%) 12.24±0.062 6.81±0.205 6.53±0.071 6.49±0.064
Fat (%) 0.98±0.003 0.79±0.001 0.77±0.007 0.77±0.004
Protein (%) 7.28±0.059 6.80±0.059 6.97±0.049 6.90±0.059
Total ash (%) 0.44±0.001 4.65±0.010 4.63±0.037 4.18±0.397
Mean ± Standard deviation values
4.7: Sensory Evaluation of Puffed Rice and Flaked Rice
The nine point hedonic scale was used for product quality evaluation on the
basis of appearance, colour, texture, flavor, taste, mouthfeel and overall
acceptability. Fig. 4.12 and 4.13 shows the average points given to all products.
The mean sensory score of puffed rice varieties are shown in Table 15, as evident
there were significant differences in the sensory quality of different varieties.
The highest score for all attributes were given to IGKV R2 (7.67 to 8.58),
followed by Mahamaya (7.25 to 7.92) with values of similar range and Barhasal
(5.42 to 6.83). The appearance and colour in sensory evaluation was found to be
lower in Barhasal variety as compared to other variety for puffed rice. Hence the
variety of Barhasal was not suitable for production of puffed rice. As observed by
expansion characteristics of grain mainly breadth wise expansion ratio, sensory
quality also indicated that IGKV R2 and Mahamaya varieties were most suitable
for production of puffed rice.
The mean sensory score of flaked rice varieties are shown in Table 4.16.
The sensory evaluation attributes of flavour, mouthfeel and overall acceptability
were found to be higher as compared to other variety in Barhasal variety. The
highest scores for all attributes were given to Barhasal (6.36 to 8.55), followed by
IGKV R2 (7.73 to 8.45) and Mahamaya (7.09 to 7.91) with values of similar range.
Table 4.17 Individual CRD analysis for proximate composition of rice and puffed rice
Moisture content (%) Fat (%)
R T1 T2 T3 R T1 T2 T3
CV (%) 0.51 1.73 0.99 1.51 0.44 0.44 1.11 0.63
F Cal 19.721*
111.136**
434.181**
203.710**
5627.540 **
1139.808 **
255.509**
823.925**
S Em 0.0442 0.0880 0.0510 0.0714 0.0035 0.0028 0.0071 0.0041
CD (5%) 0.20 0.40 0.23 0.32 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02
**means are significant at 1%,*means are significant at 5% and NS – Non Significant
R = Rice sample, T1 = 270˚C, T2 = 290˚C, T3 = 390˚C
Protein (%) Ash (%)
R T1 T2 T3 R T1 T2 T3
CV (%) 2.04 1.16 0.76 0.82 9.64 1.09 1.79 6.82
F Cal 94.002**
420.616**
718.184**
595.046**
5.224ns
548.445**
57.877**
8.690ns
S Em 0.1094 0.0582 0.0391 0.0413 0.0342 0.0298 0.0528 0.1808
CD (5%) 0.49 0.26 0.18 0.19 - 0.13 0.24 -
R = Rice sample, T1 = 270˚C, T2 = 290˚C, T3 = 390˚C
Table 4.18: Effect of varietal difference on sensory quality of puffed rice
Nutrients Rice varieties
Mahamaya Barhasal IGKV R2
Appearance 7.25±1.138 5.42±1.084 8.58±0.669
Colour 7.67±0.651 5.75±0.866 8.58±0.515
Texture 7.75±0.622 6.33±1.303 8.33±0.888
Flavor 7.50±0.798 7.58±1.379 7.75±0.754
Taste 7.92±0.900 7.58±1.379 7.67±0.985
Overall
acceptability
7.50±0.52 6.83±1.193 8.25±0.622
Mean ± Standard deviation values
Table 4.19: ANOVA for varietal difference on sensory quality of puffed rice
Source of variation DF F cal P- value F crit
Sample 2 59.774 1.24E-20 3.046
Columns 11 4.274 1.18E-05 1.842
Interaction 22 3.338 4.11E-06 1.601
Within 180
Table 4.20: Effect of varietal difference on sensory quality of flaked rice
Nutrients Rice varieties
Mahamaya Barhasal IGKV R2
Appearance 7.36±0.809 6.36±1.362 8.09±1.225
Colour 7.91±0.701 6.73±1.421 8.45±0.820
Texture 7.09±1.04 7.73±1.421 8.27±0.786
Taste 7.91±0.831 7.73±1.191 7.82±0.982
Mouthfeel 7.91±0.944 8.55±0.821 7.91±0.831
Flavor 7.45±0.934 8.00±0.894 7.73±0.905
Overall acceptability 7.73±0.647 8.27±0.647 8.09±0.701
Mean ± Standard deviation values
Table 4.21: ANOVA for varietal difference on sensory quality of puffed rice
Source of variation DF F cal P- value F crit
Sample 2 59.774 1.24E-20 3.046
Columns 11 4.274 1.18E-05 1.842
Interaction 22 3.338 4.11E-06 1.601
Within 180
Fig. 4.23: Effect of varietal difference on sensory quality of puffed rice
Fig. 4.24: Effect of varietal difference on sensory quality of flaked rice
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00 Mahamaya
Barhasal
IGKV R2
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00 Mahamaya
Barhasal
IGKV R2
CHAPTER-V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Paddy is second largest major cereal crop a member of grass family
(Graminaceae), which produces starchy seeds. Numerous varieties of paddy are
grown in the different parts of the state comprising of bold, long, cylinder, fine, and
cented etc. Many varieties are best suited for raw milling whereas many are suitable
for parboiling to produce rice for table purpose with direct cooking. On the other
hand, many of the varieties are better suited for the production of rice value added
products such as flaked rice (Poha or Chiwada), puffed rice (Muri or Murra or
Murmura).
Rice flakes is locally known by many names like aval, avalakki, poha,
chivda and beaten rice, which are prepared from paddy and has been claimed as a
good source of protein, fat and carbohydrate. It is a fast moving consumer item and
generally eaten as breakfast item. Rice flakes are made from paddy and hence they
are easy to digest. Spicy as well as sweet preparations are made from them in the
category of fast food items. Since the manufacturing process involves roasting of
rice, the shelf life of flakes is longer. Rice flakes or poha is an important breakfast
in semi-urban and rural areas and middle class families of urban India. Puffed rice
is a whole-grain puffed product obtained from pre-gelatinized milled parboiled rice,
generally prepared from preconditioning of grains by hydrothermal treatment,
followed by drying and milling. Puffed rice is used in snack foods and breakfast
cereals, and is also a popular street food in some parts of the world. It is an
ingredient of bhel puri, a popular Indian chaat item. Hence, the study will be carried
out with the following objectives:
1. To study about processing methods popularly used for producing puffed and
flaked rice.
2. To study the puffing and flaking characteristics of selected varieties of
paddy.
3. To standardization the processing parameters for the puffing and flaking of
rice
The present study entitled “Study on Puffing and Flaking Characteristics of
some Potential Paddy Varieties of Chhattisgarh” was carried out in the Department
of Agricultural Processing and Food Engineering, SVCAET and RS, FAE, IGKV,
Raipur (C.G.) and Department of Plant Physiology, Bio-Chemistry, Medicinal &
Aromatic Plants and Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, College of
Agriculture, IGKV, Raipur (C.G.). The quality analysis was done in the R.H.
Richharia Research Laboratory of the IGKV and based on the experimental results
the following results were obtained.
1. The initial moisture content while processing of three paddy varieties
namely Mahamaya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 into flaked rice and puffed rice
were determined. It was varied 10.70 to 12.10 % (wb), when processing into
flaked rice and puffed rice ,there was increase in moisture content of paddy
during soaking 30.85 to 34.16 % (wb) and 40.17 to 44.62 (wb) and flaked
rice (6.74 to 7.12 % (wb) and puffed rice 5.77 to 8.44 % (wb) respectively.
2. In paddy varieties the average values of length was found 9.51, 8.86 and
9.49 mm and width 2.94, 3.32 and 2.42 mm and thickness 2.17, 2.24 and
1.97 mm for Mahamaya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 respectively.
3. The physical properties of flaked rice of thick and thin size were determine
and it was found that average length of flaked rice for Mahamaya, Barhasal
and IGKV R2 varieties 8.67, 7.45 and 8.01mm for thick and 12.27, 9.80 and
11.82 mm for thin size and the width 3.19, 3.20 and 2.58 mm for thick and
4.32, 3.80 and 3.79 mm for thin size and the thickness 1.32, 0.80 and 0.71
mm for thick and 0.77, 0.48 and 0.43 mm for thin size respectively.
4. The average values of bulk density of paddy varieties of was found 0.716,
0.585 and 0.745 g/ml respectively and for flaked rice of thick size, it was
0.701, 0.678 and 0.649 g/ml and 0.451, 0.428 and 0.338 g/ml was found for
thin size flaked rice.
5. Bulk density and yield of puffed rice was determine at temperature 270˚C,
290˚C and 310˚C and found that when yield of puffed rice more, bulk
density of puffed rice becomes low.
6. The yield of flaked rice was found 64.60, 64.10 and 60.50 % for Mahamaya,
Barhasal and IGKV R2 varieties respectively.
7. The hulling and milling percentage of Mahamaya, Barhasal and IGKV R2
paddy varieties were found 78.43, 77.55 and 74.66 % and 66.91, 61.38 and
58.95 % respectively.
8. Functional properties of different varieties of flaked rice of thick and thin
size were determined and found to be water absorption index, water
solubility index, swelling power and water uptake were not found significant
results in thick and thin size flaked rice among the varieties of Mahamaya,
Barhasal and IGKV R2 respectively.
9. The starch content was observed higher in Mahamaya (76.23 %) and similar
for IGKV R2 (74.88 %) while lower in Barhasal (73.37 %).
10. The amylose content was observed higher in Mahamaya (25.30 %) under
category of high amylose content followed by IGKV R2 (24.55 %) and
lower in Barhasal (20.18 %) which was under category of intermediate
amylose content.
11. The amylopectin content was observed 74.70, 79.81 and 75.44 % for rice
varieties of Mahmaya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 respectively.
12. Effect of varietal difference of rice at different puffing temperature on
length expansion ratio, breadth wise expansion ratio and volume expansion
ratio were determined and found that there was a significant difference
among all varieties at 1% significant level.
13. The protein content of rice varieties was observed 6.70, 8.76 and 7.28 % for
Mahamaya, Barhasal and IGKV R2 respectively and flaked rice of thick and
thin size were found 5.65, 8.51 and 7.26 % and 5.59, 8.18 and 7.23 %
respectively. Similarly for puffed rice at 270 0C, 290
0C and 310
0C puffing
temperature were observed 6.03, 8.37, 6.80, 6.45, 8.47, 6.97, 6.23, 8.21 and
6.90 % respectively for this three varieties.
14. The fat content of rice varieties was observed between 0.98 to 1.44 % for
rice, 0.79 to 1.085 % and 0.77 to 1.035 % for thick and thin flaked rice.
Similarly for puffed rice at 270 0C, 290
0C and 310
0C puffing temperature
were observed between 0.79 to 0.97, 0.77 to 0.97 and 0.77 to 0.98 %
respectively of this three varieties.
15. The total ash content of rice varieties was observed between 0.44 to 0.59 %
for rice, 2.55 to 3.99 % and 0.58 to 1.90 % for thick and thin flaked rice
respectively. Similarly for puffed rice at 270 0C, 290
0C and 310
0C puffing
temperature were observed between 3.41 to 4.65, 3.90 to 4.63 and 3.15 to
4.18 % respectively of this three varieties.
16. Products made from flaked rice and puffed rice has almost similar overall
acceptability in sensory evaluation analysis. All judges gave approximately
equal points to each product.
CONCLUSION
Development of flaked rice of thick and thin size of different varieties
significantly affected the different properties with dimensional properties varying
from paddy into flaked rice. The flaking recovery of Barhasal and IGKV R2 was
found increased as compared to their milling recovery into raw rice and highest
flaking recovery was found for Mahamaya variety. Both roasting and flaking
resulted in the damage of some starch granules leading to their enhanced water
absorption capacity. The functional properties of flaked rice of thick size and thin
size among varieties were not observed significant difference. After processing
moisture content, protein content and fat content were decreased significantly
among all varieties but ash content was found more. Sensory quality of flaked rice
was observed best quality flaked rice of Barhasal variety followed by IGKV R2 and
Mahamaya.
Different rice varieties were tested for their suitability for production of
puffed rice with suitable puffing temperature. The physical characteristics of the
rice varieties varied with higher the bulk density for IGKV R2 and Mahamaya
variety, which had good expansion characteristics for preparation of puffed rice.
Minimum protein content of variety was observed in Mahamaya and IGKV R2,
which could be the reason for better puffing volume. Higher expansion
characteristics were observed for each variety at 310 0C puffing temperature.
Puffing yield was found to be higher for Mahamaya and IGKV R2 variety and was
also given higher sensory score. The amylose content of IGKV R2 had similar
characteristics as Mahamaya and was rated high in sensory acceptability. Hence,
IGKV R2 and Mahamaya can be recommended for puffing purposes.
Suggestion for future work
1. Other varieties may be taken for making puffed rice and flaked rice which
are found in Chhattisgarh
2. Different soaking time may be taken for flaked rice.
3. Other methods for preparing pre gelatinized milled rice for puffing may be
used for puffed rice.
4. Variation in salt concentration and moisture content may be taken for better
puffing of rice.
REFERENCES
Adekoyeni, O.O., Akinoso, R. and Fagbemi, A.S. 2015. Effect of paddy storage and
processing parameters on quality of Ofada rice in the production of ready to
eat flakes. African J. of food science Vol. 9(5), pp. 335-341.
Ananthachar TK, Narasimha HV, Shankara R, Gopal MS, Desikachar HSR 1982.
Improvement of the traditional process for rice flakes. J Food Sci Technol
19:47–50
Arya SS 1990. Grain based snack and convenience foods. Indian Food Packer
44:17–38
Bagheri, I., Alizadeh, M.R. and Safari, M. 2013. Varietal Differences in Physical
and Milling Properties of Paddy Grains. International J. of Agriculture and
Crop Sciences Vol., 5 (6), 606-611.
Basavaraj, Raviteja, G. and Deshpande S. 2015. Physical Properties of Rice for
Puffing. International J. of Latest Trends in Engineering and Technology
(IJLTET) Vol. 5 Issue 3.
Bello, M.O., Loubes, M.A., Aguerre, R.J. and Tolaba, M.P. 2015. Hydrothermal
treatment of rough rice: effect of processing conditions on product attributes.
J. Food Sci Technol 52(8): 5156–5163.
Berger, A., Rein, D., Schafer, A., Monnard, I., Gremaud, G., Bertoli, P.L.C., 2005.
Similar cholesterol-lowering properties of rice bran oil, with varied c-
oryzanol, in mildly hypercholesterolemic men. Eur. J. Nutr. 44, 163–173.
Bhatt, H.K. and Joshi, D.C. 2014. Standardization of pretreatments for production
of ready to-puff rice using microwave energy. J. of grain processing and
storage Vol 1 | Issue 2 | Pages 47-53.
Bhattacharya, K.R. and Swamy, Y.M.I. 1967. Conditions of drying parboiled paddy
for optimum milling quality. Contribution from Central food technological
Research Institute, Mysore, India. Vol. 44: 592-600.
Bhattacharya, K.R., 2011. Product making quality of rice. Rice quality: A guide to
rice properties and analysis. Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge.
Buggenhout, J.,Brijs, K., Celus, I. and Delcour, J.A. 2013. The breakage
susceptibility of raw and parboiled rice: A review. J. of Food Engineering
117: 304–315.
Chen ,Chiachung 2003. Evaluation of Air Oven Moisture Content Determination
Methods for Rough Rice. Biosystems Engineering 86 (4), 447–457.
Chitra, M., Singh, V. and Ali, S. Z. 2010. Effect of processing paddy on
digestibility of rice starch by in vitro studies. J Food Sci Technol 47(4):414–
419.
Daomukda, N., Moongngarm, A., Payakapol, L. and Noisuwan, A. 2011. Effect of
Cooking Methods on Physicochemical Properties of Brown Rice. 2011 2nd
International Conference on Environmental Science and Technology
IPCBEE vol.6, IACSIT Press, Singapore.
Deepa C., Singh, Vasudeva 2011. Nutrient changes and functional properties of rice
flakes prepared in a small scale industry. Department of Grain Science and
Technology, Central Food Technological Research Institute, Mysore (India).
Dutta, H. and Mahanta, C.L. 2012. Effect of hydrothermal treatment varying in time
and pressure on the properties of parboiled rices with different amylose
content. Food Research International 49: 655–663.
Dutta, H. and Mahanta, C.L. 2014. Traditional Parboiled Rice-Based Products
Revisited: Current Status and Future Research Challenges. Rice Science,
21(4): 187−200.
FAO (2012). www.faostat.org, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). (ON701)
FDA, 2006. Food and Drink Administration (FDA). 2006. Guidance for Industry
and FDA staff. Whole grain label statement draft guidance. Doi:
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/flgragui.html last accessed December 5th
2008.
Fofana M., Wanvoeke, J., Manful, J., Futakuchi, K., Van M. P., Zossou, E. and
Bleoussi, T. M. R. 2011. Effect of improved parboiling methods on the
physical and cooked grain characteristics of rice varieties in Benin.
International Food Research J. 18: 715-721.
Ghadge, P.N., and Prashad, K. 2012. Some Physical Properties of Rice Kernels:
Variety PR-106. J. Food Process Technology, Vol.3 • Issue 8 • 1000175.
Gupta, E., Sinha, J. and Dubey R.P. 2012. Utilization of Dehydrated Herbs in the
Formulation of Value Added Snack “Rice Flakes Mix”. J Food Process
Technol S1-002.
Hettiarachchy, N.S., Griffin, V.K., Gnanasambandam, R., Moldenhauer, K. and
Siebenmorgen, T. 1996. Physicochemical properties of three rice Varieties.
J. of Food Quality 20: 279 -289.
Hoke, K., Housova, J. and Houska M. 2005. Optimum conditions of rice puffing.
Czech J. of Food Science, 23: 1-11.
Itagi, H.N. and Singh, V. 2015. Status in physical properties of coloured rice
varieties before and after inducing retro-gradation. J. Of Food Sci Technol
52(12):7747–7758.
Jaybhaye RV, Pardeshi IL, Vengaiah PC and Srivastav PP 2014. Processing and
technology for millet based food products: a review. Journal of Ready to Eat
Food, 1(2): 32-48.
Joshi, N.D., Mohapatra, D. and Joshi, D.C. 2014a. Varietal Selection of Some
Indica Rice for Production of Puffed Rice. Food and Bioprocess
Technology, 7(1): 299-305.
Joshi, N.D., Mohapatra, D., Joshi, D.C. and Sutar, R.F. 2014b. Puffing
characteristics of parboiled milled rice in a domestic convective microwave
oven and process optimization. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 7(6):
1678-1688.
Jouki, M. and Khazaei, N. 2011. Some physical properties of rice seed (oryza
sativa). IIOABJ; Vol. 3; Issue 4:15–18.
Juliano B O. 1979. The chemical basis of rice quality. In: Proceedings of the
Workshop on Chemical Aspects of Rice Grain Quality. Manila, Philippines:
International Rice Research Institute: 69–90.
Kamaraddi, V. and Prakash, J. 2015. Assessment of suitability of selected rice
varieties for production of expanded rice. J. of food science and technology
1: 1112675.
Kanchana,S., Bharathi, S.L., Ilamaran,M. and Singaravadivel, K. 2012. Physical
Quality of Selected Rice Varieties. World J. of Agricultural Sciences 8 (5):
468-472.
Kumar, S. and Prasad, K. 2013. Effect of Paddy Parboiling and Rice Puffing on
Physical, Optical and Aerodynamic Characteristics. International J. of
Agriculture and Food Science Technology. ISSN 2249-3050, Vol. 4,
Number 8, pp. 765-770.
Kumar, S., Haq, R.-U. and Prasad, K. 2016. Studies on physico-chemical,
functional, pasting and morphological characteristics of developed extra thin
flaked rice. J. of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences.
Li, W., Bai, Y.,Mousaa, S.A.S., Zhang, Q., and She, Q. 2012. Effect of High
Hydrostatic Pressure on Physicochemical and Structural Properties of Rice
Starch. Food Bioprocess Tech. 5: 2233–2241.
Mahadevamma, S., and Tharanathan, R. N. 2007. Processed rice starch
characteristics and morphology. Eur Food Res Tech. 225:603–612.
Mahanta, C.L. and Bhattacharya, K.R. 2010. Relationship of starch changes to
puffing expansion of parboiled rice. J food Sci Technol 47(2):182-187.
Maisont, S. and Narkrugsa, W. 2009a. Effects of Some Physicochemical Properties
of Paddy Rice Varieties on Puffing Qualities by Microwave. Kasetsart J.
(Nat. Sci.) 43: 566 - 575.
Maisont, S. and Narkrugsa, W. 2009b. Effects of Salt, Moisture Content and
Microwave Power on Puffing Qualities of Puffed Rice. Kasetsart J. (Nat.
Sci.) 44 : 251 – 261.
McCabe WL, Smith JC, Harriott P. 1986. Unit operations of chemical engineering,
McGraw-Hill, New York.
Miah, M.A.K., Haque, A., Dauglass, M.P. and Clarke, B. 2002. Parboiling of rice.
Part I: Effect of hot soaking time on quality of milled rice. International J. of
Food Science and Technology , 37, 527–537.
Mir, S.A., Bosco, S.J.D. and Sunooj, K.V. 2013. Evaluation of physical properties
of rice cultivars grown in the temperate region of India. International Food
Research J. 20(4): 1521-1527.
Mishra, G., Joshi, D.C. and Panda, B.K. 2014.I Popping and Puffing of Cereal
Grains: A Review. Journal of Grain Processing and Storage Vol 1 Issue 2
Pages 34-46.
Mohsenin N. 1980. Physical properties of plant and animal materials, New York:
Gorden and Breach.
Mujoo, R. and Ali, S.Z. 1997. Susceptibility of Starch to in vitro Enzyme
Hydrolysis in Rice, Rice Flakes and Intermediary Products. Lebensm.-Wiss.
u.-Technol., 31, 114–121.
Narasimha HV 1995. Value addition to food grains through food processing: A
CFTRI approach. CFTRI Annual Report, p 68–72
Odenigbo, A.M., Ngadi, M., Ejebe, C., Nwankpa, C., Danbaba, N., Ndindeng, S.
and Manful, J. 2013. Study on the gelatinization properties and amylose
content of rice varieties from Nigeria and Cameroun. International J. of
Nutrition and Food Sciences 2(4): 181-186.
Odenigbo, A.M., Ngadi, M., Ejebe, C., Woin, N., Ndindeng, S.A. 2014.
Physicochemical, Cooking Characteristics and Textural Properties of TOX
3145 Milled Rice. J. of Food Research; Vol. 3, No. 2.
Oko, A.O., Ubi, B.E. and Dambaba, N. 2012. Rice Cooking Quality and Physico
Chemical Characteristics: a Comparative Analysis of Selected Local and
Newly Introduced Rice Varieties in Ebonyi State, Nigeria. Food and Public
Health, 2(1): 43-49.
Pal, V., Garg, S.K., and Pandey, J.P. 2013. Effect of degree of polishing on physical
and milling properties of rice. International Journal of Processing and Post
Harvest Technology. Vol. 4 | Issue 2 | 90-93.
Ranganna, S. 1986. Handbook of analysis and quality control of fruits and
vegetable products. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill publications.
Reddy, B.S. and Chakraverty, A. 2004. Physical Properties of Raw and Parboiled
Paddy. Biosystems Engineering 88 (4), 461–466.
Saeed, F., Pasha, I., Anjum, F.M., Suleria, H.A.R. and Farooq, M. 2011. Effect of
parboiling on physico-chemical & cooking attributes of different rice
cultivars. Internet J. of Food Safety, Vol.13, p. 237-245.
Sailaja, Y.S. 1992. Popping and flaking quality of sorghum cultivars in relation to
physicochemical characteristics and in vitro starch and protein digestibility.
Department of Foods and Nutrition College of Home Science Andhra
Pradesh Agricultural University Rajendranagar. Hyderabad - 500030.
Sarla 2013 Studies on test milling of some common varieties of summer paddy and
kharif paddy grown in the state. Department of agricultural processing and
food engineering, Faculty of agricultural engineering Indira Gandhi Krishi
Vishwavidhyalaya, Raipur (C.G.)
Shih, F., King, J., Daigle, K., An, H. J., & Ali, R. 2007. Physicochemical properties
of rice starch modified by hydrothermal treatments. Cereal Chemistry, 527–
531.
Sreenarayanan VV, Subramanian V, Visvanathan R. 1985. Physical and thermal
properties of soyabean. Proceedings of Indian Society of Agricultural
Engineers 3:pp. 161–169.
Takhellambam, R.D., Chimmad, B.V. and Parkasam, J.N. 2016. Ready-to-cook
millet flakes based on minor millets for modern consumer. J. Food Sci
Technol 53(2):1312–1318.
Thomas, R.,Wan-Nadiah, W.A. and Bhat, R. 2013. Physiochemical properties,
proximate composition, and cooking qualities of locally grown and imported
rice varieties marketed in Penang, Malaysia. International Food Research J.
20(3): 1345-1351. Thumrongchote, D., Suzuki, T., Laohasongkram, K. and Chaiwanichsiri, S. 2012.
Properties of Non-glutinous Thai Rice Flour: Effect of rice variety. Research
J. of Pharmaceutical, Biological and Chemical Sciences Vol. 3 Issue 1 Page
No. 150.
Varnamkhasti, M.G., Mobli, H., Jafari, A., Rafiee, S., Heidarysoltanabadi, M. and
Kheiralipour, K. 2007. Some Engineering Properties of Paddy (var.
Sazandegi). International J. of Agriculture & Biology 1560–8530/09–5–
763–766.
Vengaiah, P.C., Srivastav, P.P. and Mjumdar, G.C. 2015. Design related physical
properties of major cereals. J. of Global Biosciences, Vol. 4, special issue 1,
pp. 1910-1914.
Venkatachalapathy, N. and Udhayakumar, R. 2013. Effects of Continuous Steaming
on Milling Characteristics of Two Indica Rice Varieties. Rice Science,
20(4): 309−312.
Verma, D. K., Mohan, M., Prabhakar, P. K. and Srivastav, P. P. 2014. Physico-
chemical and cooking characteristics of Azad basmati. International Food
Research J. 22(4): 1380-1389.
Villareal, C.P. and Juliano B.O. 1987. Varietal differences in quality characteristics
of puffed rices. Cereal Chemistry, 64(4):337-342.
Yadav, R.B., Khatkar, B.S. and Yadav, B.S. 2007. Morphological, physicochemical
and cooking properties of some Indian rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars. J. of
Agricultural Technology 3(2): 203-210.
Zareiforoush, H., Komarizadeh, M.H. and Alizadeh, M.R. 2009. Effect of Moisture
Content on Some Physical Properties of Paddy Grains. Research J. of
Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology 1(3): 132-139.
APPENDIX-A
Table: 1(a) Physical properties of Mahamaya variety of paddy
S.
No.
Length
(mm)
Width
(mm)
Thickness
(mm)
GMD
(mm)
Sphericity
(%)
Aspect
ratio (%)
Surface area
(mm²)
1. 10.31 3.08 2.18 4.11 39.83 29.87 52.94
2. 10.13 2.99 2.02 3.94 38.90 29.52 48.75
3. 9.36 3.03 2.3 4.03 43.01 32.37 50.88
4. 8.93 3.02 2.14 3.86 43.28 33.82 46.89
5. 9 2.59 2.2 3.72 41.28 28.78 43.34
6. 9.81 2.92 2.23 4.00 40.75 29.77 50.18
7. 9.27 2.9 2.14 3.86 41.64 31.28 46.79
8. 10.07 2.72 2.16 3.90 38.69 27.01 47.68
9. 8.96 2.75 2.18 3.77 42.11 30.69 44.70
10. 9.71 2.77 2.25 3.93 40.43 28.53 48.40
11. 9.53 3.04 2.25 4.02 42.23 31.90 50.86
12. 9.53 2.92 2.45 4.09 42.87 30.64 52.40
13. 9.47 2.94 2.03 3.84 40.52 31.05 46.24
14. 9.83 2.8 2.11 3.87 39.40 28.48 47.09
15. 9.82 2.91 2.12 3.93 39.99 29.63 48.43
16. 8.85 3.12 2.18 3.92 44.28 35.25 48.23
17. 8.9 3.02 2.34 3.98 44.68 33.93 49.66
18. 9.18 3.05 2.25 3.98 43.34 33.22 49.71
19. 9.86 2.6 2.14 3.80 38.54 26.37 45.34
20. 9.02 3.13 2.13 3.92 43.43 34.70 48.20
21. 9.52 3.15 2.26 4.08 42.83 33.09 52.20
22. 9.33 2.87 2.36 3.98 42.69 30.76 49.82
23. 9.76 2.91 2.26 4.00 41.02 29.82 50.34
24. 9.54 2.89 2.02 3.82 40.03 30.29 45.79
25. 9.58 2.91 2.1 3.88 40.53 30.38 47.34
26. 9.17 2.94 2.16 3.88 42.27 32.06 47.17
27. 9.36 2.79 2.28 3.90 41.72 29.81 47.88
28. 9.43 3.03 2.02 3.86 40.98 32.13 46.90
29. 9.33 2.94 2.18 3.91 41.91 31.51 48.02
30. 9.43 2.78 2.02 3.76 39.82 29.48 44.28
31. 9.52 2.96 2.19 3.95 41.51 31.09 49.04
32. 9.25 2.86 2.51 4.05 43.78 30.92 51.49
33. 9.59 2.96 2.14 3.93 40.99 30.87 48.52
34. 9.47 2.89 2.02 3.81 40.23 30.52 45.57
35. 9.65 3.03 2.16 3.98 41.27 31.40 49.80
36. 9.74 2.94 2.1 3.92 40.22 30.18 48.20
37. 10.3 3.09 2.04 4.02 39.02 30.00 50.72
38. 9.62 2.79 2.22 3.91 40.60 29.00 47.90
39. 9.96 2.93 2.23 4.02 40.38 29.42 50.80
40. 9.16 3.13 2.32 4.05 44.23 34.17 51.55
41. 9.7 3.01 2.15 3.97 40.97 31.03 49.60
42. 9.97 2.97 2.21 4.03 40.42 29.79 50.99
43. 9.36 2.91 2.23 3.93 42.00 31.09 48.52
44. 9.97 2.99 2.07 3.95 39.64 29.99 49.03
45. 9.43 2.89 2.16 3.89 41.25 30.65 47.52
46. 9.52 2.82 2.2 3.89 40.91 29.62 47.62
47. 10.01 3.01 2.19 4.04 40.37 30.07 51.27
48. 9.71 3.1 2.17 4.03 41.48 31.93 50.93
49. 9.17 2.67 2.28 3.82 41.68 29.12 45.86
50. 9.06 2.08 2.93 3.81 42.03 22.96 45.53
51. 9.21 2.96 2.09 3.85 41.78 32.14 46.49
52. 9.55 2.68 2.05 3.74 39.20 28.06 44.01
53. 9.93 2.89 2.23 4.00 40.28 29.10 50.24
54. 9.11 3.07 2.15 3.92 43.00 33.70 48.19
55. 9.85 3.08 2.02 3.94 40.03 31.27 48.81
56. 8.86 2.97 2.25 3.90 43.99 33.52 47.70
57. 9.78 3.11 2.08 3.98 40.74 31.80 49.85
58. 9.64 3.15 2.02 3.94 40.91 32.68 48.84
59. 9.6 2.84 2.2 3.91 40.78 29.58 48.11
60. 9 2.66 2.08 3.68 40.88 29.56 42.50
61. 9.14 3.21 2.04 3.91 42.80 35.12 48.05
62. 10.13 2.78 1.98 3.82 37.71 27.44 45.83
63. 9.88 3.23 1.85 3.89 39.41 32.69 47.61
64. 9.87 2.57 2.27 3.86 39.12 26.04 46.82
65. 9.32 2.55 2.01 3.63 38.93 27.36 41.34
66. 9.17 3.22 2.12 3.97 43.30 35.11 49.50
67. 9.44 2.88 2.25 3.94 41.74 30.51 48.75
68. 9.73 3.05 2.24 4.05 41.63 31.35 51.53
69. 9.84 3.15 2.16 4.06 41.27 32.01 51.77
70. 9.34 2.71 2.2 3.82 40.89 29.01 45.79
71. 10.03 2.88 2.21 4.00 39.85 28.71 50.16
72. 9.6 2.99 2.23 4.00 41.67 31.15 50.25
73. 9.62 2.98 2.08 3.91 40.61 30.98 47.93
74. 10.13 2.91 2.13 3.97 39.24 28.73 49.60
75. 9.66 3.04 2.27 4.05 41.97 31.47 51.62
76. 8.62 2.51 2.01 3.52 40.80 29.12 38.83
77. 10.4 3.17 2.06 4.08 39.23 30.48 52.27
78. 9.28 2.98 2.12 3.88 41.86 32.11 47.39
79. 9.61 2.94 2.19 3.96 41.16 30.59 49.12
80. 9.17 3.12 2.09 3.91 42.64 34.02 48.01
81. 8.96 3.1 2.1 3.88 43.28 34.60 47.23
82. 9.21 3.02 2.33 4.02 43.61 32.79 50.66
83. 8.83 3.26 2.29 4.04 45.75 36.92 51.24
84. 9.77 2.91 2.23 3.99 40.81 29.79 49.93
85. 10.22 2.87 2.27 4.05 39.66 28.08 51.58
86. 10.25 3.12 2.2 4.13 40.28 30.44 53.51
87. 9.68 3.2 2.15 4.05 41.87 33.06 51.59
88. 9.1 2.99 2.23 3.93 43.18 32.86 48.49
89. 9 2.86 2.02 3.73 41.47 31.78 43.74
90. 9.86 3.19 2.24 4.13 41.89 32.35 53.56
91. 8.98 2.93 2.21 3.87 43.14 32.63 47.13
92. 8.41 2.95 2.11 3.74 44.48 35.08 43.94
93. 9.41 3.23 2.16 4.03 42.87 34.33 51.10
94. 9.61 2.87 2.04 3.83 39.87 29.86 46.11
95. 9.23 3.29 2.11 4.00 43.35 35.64 50.28
96. 9.51 3.06 2.28 4.05 42.57 32.18 51.46
97. 8.99 3.15 1.96 3.81 42.43 35.04 45.69
98. 10.45 3.01 2.21 4.11 39.35 28.80 53.09
99. 9.71 3.08 2.19 4.03 41.51 31.72 51.02
100. 9.81 2.66 2.15 3.83 39.02 31.73 46.02
Table: 1(b) Physical properties of Barhasal variety of paddy
S. No. Length
(mm)
Width
(mm)
Thickness
(mm)
GMD
(mm)
Sphericity
(%)
Aspect ratio
(%)
Surface area
(mm²)
1. 8.66 3.28 2.15 3.938 45.474 0.379 48.720
2. 8.84 3.36 2.24 4.052 45.838 0.380 51.583
3. 9.15 3.35 2.11 4.014 43.869 0.366 50.619
4. 8.69 3.34 2.21 4.003 46.065 0.384 50.341
5. 8.88 3.32 2.3 4.078 45.921 0.374 52.240
6. 8.87 3.14 2.3 4.001 45.110 0.354 50.296
7. 8.78 3.39 2.09 3.962 45.129 0.386 49.322
8. 8.56 3.3 2.2 3.961 46.273 0.386 49.290
9. 9.44 3.47 2.2 4.161 44.083 0.368 54.404
10. 9.22 3.36 2.21 4.091 44.370 0.364 52.576
11. 9.2 3.32 2.17 4.047 43.989 0.361 51.453
12. 8.34 3.47 2.22 4.005 48.023 0.416 50.394
13. 8.78 3.33 2.53 4.198 47.811 0.379 55.359
14. 8.72 3.45 2.19 4.039 46.317 0.396 51.247
15. 9.85 3.41 2.44 4.344 44.099 0.346 59.275
16. 7.8 3.33 2.22 3.863 49.530 0.427 46.890
17. 8.68 3.39 2.28 4.063 46.813 0.391 51.870
18. 8.75 3.23 2.13 3.919 44.791 0.369 48.255
19. 9.34 3.05 2.38 4.078 43.658 0.327 52.235
20. 8.97 3.26 2.32 4.078 45.468 0.363 52.257
21. 8.33 3.34 2.36 4.034 48.431 0.401 51.131
22. 8.29 3.61 2.05 3.944 47.576 0.435 48.868
23. 9.71 3.41 2.29 4.233 43.590 0.351 56.280
24. 7.94 3.28 2.18 3.843 48.406 0.413 46.407
25. 8.44 3.15 2.25 3.911 46.338 0.373 48.051
26. 8.62 3.61 2.23 4.109 47.672 0.419 53.051
27. 8.5 3.46 2.3 4.074 47.935 0.407 52.155
28. 8.53 3.3 2.35 4.044 47.413 0.387 51.385
29. 8.85 3.3 2.35 4.094 46.263 0.373 52.662
30. 8.91 3.45 2.32 4.147 46.543 0.387 54.026
31. 9.18 3.49 2.15 4.099 44.654 0.380 52.790
32. 9.33 3.34 2.15 4.062 43.532 0.358 51.824
33. 8.15 2.83 2.2 3.702 45.425 0.347 43.059
34. 8.6 3.33 2.21 3.985 46.339 0.387 49.893
35. 8.09 3.22 1.96 3.710 45.857 0.398 43.237
36. 8.57 3.13 2.11 3.839 44.801 0.365 46.311
37. 8.36 3.27 2 3.795 45.400 0.391 45.256
38. 9.31 3.2 2.01 3.912 42.023 0.344 48.085
39. 8.71 3.15 1.79 3.662 42.044 0.362 42.131
40. 8.48 3.22 2.31 3.981 46.942 0.380 49.780
41. 9.02 3.3 2.18 4.018 44.550 0.366 50.730
42. 8.38 3.46 2.32 4.067 48.532 0.413 51.962
43. 9.22 3.5 2.21 4.147 44.978 0.380 54.027
44. 9.48 3.34 2.34 4.200 44.305 0.352 55.420
45. 9.58 3.55 2.11 4.156 43.377 0.371 54.250
46. 8.33 3.34 2.41 4.063 48.771 0.401 51.851
47. 8.62 3.02 2.03 3.753 43.534 0.350 44.241
48. 8.71 3.36 2.53 4.199 48.210 0.386 55.395
49. 9.14 3.44 2.17 4.086 44.707 0.376 52.456
50. 9.05 3.25 2.27 4.057 44.827 0.359 51.704
51. 8.82 3.35 2.16 3.996 45.309 0.380 50.172
52. 8.57 3.01 2.2 3.843 44.841 0.351 46.394
53. 8.47 3.1 2.11 3.812 45.008 0.366 45.656
54. 9.25 3.44 2.23 4.140 44.757 0.372 53.846
55. 9.1 3.11 1.91 3.781 41.550 0.342 44.913
56. 9.71 3.59 2.38 4.361 44.917 0.370 59.760
57. 9.63 3.28 2.65 4.374 45.424 0.341 60.115
58. 8.83 3.42 2.46 4.204 47.608 0.387 55.518
59. 8.85 3.5 2.35 4.175 47.179 0.395 54.769
60. 9.07 3.3 1.98 3.899 42.985 0.364 47.754
61. 8.9 3.59 2.06 4.038 45.366 0.403 51.213
62. 8.49 3.36 2.31 4.039 47.575 0.396 51.253
63. 9.43 3.32 2.43 4.237 44.934 0.352 56.405
64. 9.35 3.03 2.49 4.132 44.192 0.324 53.635
65. 8.17 3.32 2.43 4.039 49.442 0.406 51.262
66. 9.19 3.39 1.48 3.586 39.019 0.369 40.396
67. 8.84 3.35 2.3 4.084 46.198 0.379 52.396
68. 8.33 3.33 2.24 3.961 47.548 0.400 49.284
69. 9.86 3.41 2.33 4.279 43.396 0.346 57.519
70. 9.58 3.23 2.4 4.203 43.876 0.337 55.506
71. 8.05 3.07 2.12 3.742 46.483 0.381 43.988
72. 9.52 3.12 2.11 3.972 41.724 0.328 49.568
73. 8.93 3.11 2.39 4.049 45.340 0.348 51.502
74. 8.7 3.33 2.36 4.089 47.001 0.383 52.529
75. 8.26 3.31 2.36 4.011 48.558 0.401 50.539
76. 9.67 3.35 2.18 4.133 42.745 0.346 53.675
77. 8.91 3.56 2.54 4.319 48.474 0.400 58.604
78. 8.96 3.36 2.35 4.136 46.160 0.375 53.739
79. 8.36 3.36 2.28 4.001 47.858 0.402 50.289
80. 8.84 3.26 2.48 4.150 46.945 0.369 54.104
81. 9.14 3.52 2.28 4.186 45.800 0.385 55.051
82. 8.34 3.36 2.17 3.932 47.151 0.403 48.580
83. 8.86 3.28 2.26 4.035 45.538 0.370 51.140
84. 9.38 3.39 2.6 4.356 46.443 0.361 59.621
85. 9.04 3.38 2.06 3.978 44.003 0.374 49.711
86. 8.13 3.1 1.99 3.688 45.361 0.381 42.725
87. 9.01 3.31 2.44 4.175 46.336 0.367 54.758
88. 8.53 3.08 2.04 3.770 44.201 0.361 44.658
89. 8.35 3.27 1.97 3.775 45.208 0.392 44.766
90. 9.4 3.15 2.33 4.101 43.632 0.335 52.846
91. 8.78 3.37 2.52 4.209 47.938 0.384 55.654
92. 8.92 2.93 2.05 3.770 42.263 0.328 44.649
93. 9.13 3.52 2.02 4.019 44.020 0.386 50.745
94. 8.87 3.46 1.91 3.885 43.795 0.390 47.407
95. 9.01 3.32 2.35 4.127 45.806 0.368 53.510
96. 8.07 3.83 2.42 4.213 52.210 0.475 55.771
97. 9.53 3.05 2.09 3.931 41.250 0.320 48.549
98. 9.05 3.42 2.56 4.295 47.459 0.378 57.955
99. 8.75 3.6 2.46 4.263 48.724 0.411 57.101
100. 9.39 3.24 2.05 3.966 42.233 0.345 49.407
Table:1(c) Physical properties of IGKV R2 variety of paddy
Length
(mm)
Width
(mm)
Thickness
(mm)
GMD
(mm)
Sphericity
(%)
Aspect ratio
(%)
Surface area
(mm²)
1. 9.58 2.63 1.95 3.938 41.107 0.275 48.720
2. 9.77 2.43 2.01 4.052 41.475 0.249 51.583
3. 9.72 2.4 1.99 4.014 41.297 0.247 50.619
4. 9.69 2.65 2.08 4.003 41.311 0.273 50.341
5. 9.63 2.52 1.95 4.078 42.345 0.262 52.240
6. 8.99 2.19 2.02 4.001 44.508 0.244 50.296
7. 8.86 2.27 1.91 3.962 44.721 0.256 49.322
8. 9.49 2.48 1.92 3.961 41.739 0.261 49.290
9. 8.82 2.5 1.85 4.161 47.182 0.283 54.404
10. 9.75 2.46 2.04 4.091 41.958 0.252 52.576
11. 9.45 2.44 1.96 4.047 42.825 0.258 51.453
12. 9.65 2.5 2.04 4.005 41.504 0.259 50.394
13. 9.57 2.35 1.99 4.198 43.864 0.246 55.359
14. 9.05 2.11 1.93 4.039 44.628 0.233 51.247
15. 9.85 2.55 2.02 4.344 44.099 0.259 59.275
16. 9.78 2.39 2.01 3.863 39.503 0.244 46.890
17. 9.81 2.54 2.05 4.063 41.421 0.259 51.870
18. 9.43 2.34 2.05 3.919 41.561 0.248 48.255
19. 9.91 2.53 1.98 4.078 41.147 0.255 52.235
20. 9.21 2.27 2.02 4.078 44.283 0.246 52.257
21. 10.08 2.42 1.93 4.034 40.023 0.240 51.131
22. 9.55 2.57 2.05 3.944 41.299 0.269 48.868
23. 9.58 2.47 2.11 4.233 44.181 0.258 56.280
24. 9.87 2.77 1.91 3.843 38.940 0.281 46.407
25. 9.85 2.23 2.07 3.911 39.705 0.226 48.051
26. 9.21 2.34 1.52 4.109 44.618 0.254 53.051
27. 9.74 2.34 1.85 4.074 41.833 0.240 52.155
28. 9.19 2.34 2.24 4.044 44.008 0.255 51.385
29. 9.33 2.6 2.05 4.094 43.883 0.279 52.662
30. 9.58 2.62 1.98 4.147 43.288 0.273 54.026
31. 9.9 2.44 1.96 4.099 41.406 0.246 52.790
32. 9.14 2.27 1.97 4.062 44.437 0.248 51.824
33. 9 2.44 2.08 3.702 41.135 0.271 43.059
34. 10.29 2.52 1.94 3.985 38.728 0.245 49.893
35. 9.57 2.26 2.19 3.710 38.765 0.236 43.237
36. 9.75 2.43 2.05 3.839 39.379 0.249 46.311
37. 10.23 2.29 2.04 3.795 37.101 0.224 45.256
38. 9.5 2.46 1.81 3.912 41.182 0.259 48.085
39. 9.76 2.4 2.06 3.662 37.521 0.246 42.131
40. 9.2 2.54 1.91 3.981 43.268 0.276 49.780
41. 9.43 2.38 2.01 4.018 42.614 0.252 50.730
42. 9.65 2.21 1.96 4.067 42.145 0.229 51.962
43. 9.53 2.21 1.84 4.147 43.515 0.232 54.027
44. 8.04 2.35 2.1 4.200 52.240 0.292 55.420
45. 10.29 2.36 2.12 4.156 40.384 0.229 54.250
46. 9.14 2.35 2.04 4.063 44.448 0.257 51.851
47. 9.16 2.3 2.01 3.753 40.968 0.251 44.241
48. 9.51 2.05 1.98 4.199 44.155 0.216 55.395
49. 9.69 2.34 1.82 4.086 42.169 0.241 52.456
50. 9.16 2.37 1.61 4.057 44.288 0.259 51.704
51. 9.51 2.08 1.97 3.996 42.022 0.219 50.172
52. 9.69 2.4 1.86 3.843 39.658 0.248 46.394
53. 10.03 2.31 1.96 3.812 38.008 0.230 45.656
54. 9.16 2.4 1.71 4.140 45.197 0.262 53.846
55. 9.48 2.45 1.97 3.781 39.884 0.258 44.913
56. 9.26 2.6 1.93 4.361 47.100 0.281 59.760
57. 9.67 2.41 1.96 4.374 45.236 0.249 60.115
58. 9.75 2.22 2.06 4.204 43.116 0.228 55.518
59. 9.1 2.84 1.97 4.175 45.883 0.312 54.769
60. 8.35 2.03 1.96 3.899 46.692 0.243 47.754
61. 10.09 2.46 2.01 4.038 40.015 0.244 51.213
62. 9.62 2.37 1.98 4.039 41.987 0.246 51.253
63. 9.33 2.28 1.7 4.237 45.415 0.244 56.405
64. 9.06 2.55 2.15 4.132 45.606 0.281 53.635
65. 9.86 2.38 1.95 4.039 40.968 0.241 51.262
66. 9.76 2.33 2.05 3.586 36.740 0.239 40.396
67. 9.71 2.47 2.02 4.084 42.059 0.254 52.396
68. 9.46 2.46 2.03 3.961 41.869 0.260 49.284
69. 9.7 2.43 2.03 4.279 44.112 0.251 57.519
70. 9.51 2.38 1.96 4.203 44.199 0.250 55.506
71. 9.11 2.59 1.9 3.742 41.074 0.284 43.988
72. 9.15 2.26 1.89 3.972 43.411 0.247 49.568
73. 9.13 2.24 2.08 4.049 44.347 0.245 51.502
74. 9.21 2.2 2 4.089 44.398 0.239 52.529
75. 9.1 3.18 1.91 4.011 44.076 0.349 50.539
76. 9.62 2.35 1.96 4.133 42.967 0.244 53.675
77. 9.13 2.12 1.84 4.319 47.306 0.232 58.604
78. 9.69 2.41 1.9 4.136 42.682 0.249 53.739
79. 9.14 2.59 1.94 4.001 43.774 0.283 50.289
80. 10 2.47 1.98 4.150 41.499 0.247 54.104
81. 10.39 2.47 1.89 4.186 40.290 0.238 55.051
82. 9.8 2.48 1.93 3.932 40.126 0.253 48.580
83. 9.62 2.69 1.94 4.035 41.940 0.280 51.140
84. 9.16 2.73 1.94 4.356 47.559 0.298 59.621
85. 9.73 2.11 1.84 3.978 40.883 0.217 49.711
86. 8.88 2.41 2.03 3.688 41.529 0.271 42.725
87. 9.27 2.56 2.09 4.175 45.037 0.276 54.758
88. 8.74 2.52 2.01 3.770 43.139 0.288 44.658
89. 9.66 2.34 1.91 3.775 39.077 0.242 44.766
90. 9.63 2.37 2.01 4.101 42.590 0.246 52.846
91. 9.44 2.6 2.01 4.209 44.586 0.275 55.654
92. 9.31 2.46 1.99 3.770 40.493 0.264 44.649
93. 8.73 2.44 1.9 4.019 46.037 0.279 50.745
94. 10.25 2.49 2.01 3.885 37.898 0.243 47.407
95. 9.4 2.4 2.06 4.127 43.905 0.255 53.510
96. 9.47 2.41 1.98 4.213 44.492 0.254 55.771
97. 9.68 2.58 2.15 3.931 40.610 0.267 48.549
98. 9.03 2.69 2.02 4.295 47.565 0.298 57.955
99. 9.45 2.53 2.05 4.263 45.115 0.268 57.101
100. 9.87 2.64 2.03 3.966 40.179 0.267 49.407
Table:1(d) Densities value of different variety of paddy
Varieties Mahamaya Barhasal IGKV R2
Bulk density
Avg. 0.72 0.58 0.69
Max. 0.69 0.57 0.65
Min. 0.73 0.62 0.74
S.D 0.01 0.02 0.03
True Density
Avg. 1.10 1.08 1.15
Max. 1.00 1.00 1.00
Min. 1.25 1.25 1.25
S.D 0.13 0.12 0.13
Angle of repose
Avg. 31.23 29.57 33.55
Max. 33.20 32.62 35.75
Min. 26.98 27.47 30.96
S.D 1.93 1.78 1.87
Table:1(e) Coefficient of friction of different variety of paddy
Varieties Mahamaya Barhasal IGKV R2
Avg. 0.24 0.25 0.23
Plywood Max. 0.29 0.29 0.25
Min. 0.19 0.23 0.21
S.D 0.02 0.02 0.02
Avg. 0.27 0.24 0.22
Glass Max. 0.31 0.27 0.25
Min. 0.23 0.21 0.18
S.D 0.02 0.02 0.02
Avg. 0.40 0.42 0.39
Mild steel Max. 0.42 0.45 0.42
Min. 0.38 0.40 0.36
S.D 0.01 0.02 0.02
Avg. 0.43 0.51 0.49
Rubber Max. 0.47 0.58 0.53
Min. 0.40 0.47 0.45
S.D 0.02 0.04 0.03
Table:1(f) Dimensional value of flaked rice (Mahamaya)
S. No. Thick size Thin size
Length Width Thickness Length Width Thickness
1. 9.95 3.57 0.94 11.37 3.73 0.94
2. 8.15 3.04 1.45 11.5 4.57 0.77
3. 8.38 3.03 1.55 12.4 4.7 0.7
4. 8.54 3.25 1.31 11.54 4.17 0.77
5. 9.78 3.11 1.41 11.99 4.49 1.14
6. 8.32 3.28 1.29 12.48 4.05 0.73
7. 8.58 3.53 1.04 12.69 4.77 0.76
8. 9.21 3.57 1.38 13.08 4.39 0.78
9. 8.13 3.26 1.38 13.16 4.52 0.7
10. 8.66 3.57 1.06 11.32 4.37 0.81
11. 8.82 3.25 1.34 12.37 4.48 0.65
12. 8.7 3.38 1.13 13.83 5.31 0.67
13. 7.95 2.89 1.43 13.9 5.43 0.63
14. 9.43 3.38 1.05 11.91 4.31 0.57
15. 9.5 3.6 1.22 16.48 5.32 0.58
16. 8.45 3.13 1.46 12.33 4.07 0.87
17. 9.06 3.28 1.17 11.54 3.82 0.72
18. 8.34 3.14 1.33 10.68 3.66 0.89
19. 8.25 3.05 1.39 11.09 4.31 0.7
20. 8.29 2.89 1.29 12.3 4.15 0.68
21. 9.34 3.02 1.32 14.53 4.73 0.62
22. 8.52 2.99 1.52 10.8 3.9 0.92
23. 8.63 3.21 1.33 10.98 3.82 1
24. 7.87 2.99 1.43 11.38 4.55 0.69
25. 8.48 3.21 1.39 12 4.4 0.76
26. 8.9 3.61 1.15 10.04 3.81 0.87
27. 9.28 3.41 1.16 12.09 3.95 0.94
28. 8.15 2.94 1.48 12.1 4 0.86
29. 9.25 3.02 1.4 11.28 3.93 0.82
30. 8.92 3.44 1.33 12.98 3.96 0.84
31. 9.63 3.26 1.4 14.55 4.33 0.72
32. 7.74 2.95 1.43 12.19 4 0.71
33. 8.05 2.94 1.44 13.27 4.15 0.84
34. 8.29 2.92 1.3 14.08 5.75 0.66
35. 9.04 3.52 1.14 11.81 4.37 0.75
36. 9.68 3.67 1.02 9.9 4.04 0.83
37. 8.69 3.04 1.53 15.53 5.46 0.58
38. 7.85 3.07 1.55 12.59 4.05 0.89
39. 8.73 3 1.56 11.12 4.19 0.86
40. 9.52 3.48 1.23 12.14 3.99 0.76
41. 9.9 3.5 1.11 10.41 3.94 0.87
42. 8.49 2.94 1.34 12.38 4.63 0.55
43. 7.7 2.82 1.47 11.45 3.74 0.94
44. 8.29 2.71 1.49 13.79 4.01 0.65
45. 8.02 3.01 1.3 11.25 4.02 0.81
46. 8.08 3.04 1.38 12.6 4.53 0.7
47. 9.48 3.2 1.24 11.71 4.6 0.83
48. 8.46 3.16 1.27 12.26 4.3 0.73
49. 8.31 3.22 1.38 12.38 4.19 0.77
50. 7.98 3.16 1.5 11.99 4.36 0.7
Table:1(g) Dimensional value of flaked rice (Barhasal)
S. No. Thick size Thin size
Length Width Thickness Length Width Thickness
1. 8.41 3.88 1.11 13.4 6.12 0.63
2. 8.61 4.15 1.04 13.11 5.09 0.75
3. 8.41 3.35 1.17 13.35 5.29 0.74
4. 8.59 3.79 1.28 11.78 7.45 0.97
5. 7.87 3.58 1.13 12.55 6.4 0.7
6. 9.39 3.92 1.01 12.44 7.34 0.72
7. 8.32 3.37 1.17 13.2 5.32 0.65
8. 7.91 3.48 1.27 12.25 5.29 0.8
9. 8.77 3.74 1.2 13.96 5.34 0.64
10. 10.62 4.16 0.8 13.72 4.86 0.71
11. 8.13 4.04 1.18 11.92 4.16 0.74
12. 8.68 3.5 1.06 14.18 6.31 0.61
13. 7.92 3.78 1.12 13.52 5.62 0.6
14. 7.81 3.21 1.2 12.83 5.32 0.71
15. 8.59 3.6 1.19 13.76 5.57 0.69
16. 8.4 3.79 1.06 12.46 6.36 0.62
17. 8.99 3.89 1.07 12.44 5.22 0.6
18. 7.92 3.32 1.25 12.62 4.74 0.71
19. 8.11 3.68 1.37 11.8 5.4 0.7
20. 8.84 4.16 1.04 13.2 4.69 0.75
21. 7.74 3.74 1.08 12.67 5.24 0.59
22. 8.46 3.42 1.31 13.91 6.12 0.48
23. 9.19 3.61 0.94 12.73 5.5 0.73
24. 8.32 3.88 1.24 13.26 5.27 0.55
25. 8.76 3.3 1.07 13.03 5.33 0.59
26. 8.34 3.96 1.2 12.04 5.79 0.57
27. 8.3 3.37 1.15 13.13 4.94 0.69
28. 7.99 3.35 1.23 12.28 4.6 0.73
29. 8.4 4.06 0.98 11.05 4.4 0.74
30. 8.42 3.56 1.24 13.94 6.22 0.52
31. 8.74 3.77 1.23 10.14 4.48 0.88
32. 7.87 3.82 1.33 10.03 4.3 0.97
33. 8.16 3.2 1.34 11.55 5.21 0.63
34. 7.78 3.64 1.1 10.18 4.37 0.74
35. 8.91 3.89 1.03 10.83 4.36 0.75
36. 8.21 3.86 1.21 11.45 5.01 0.69
37. 8.5 3.63 1.25 9.8 3.8 1.09
38. 8.57 3.76 1.12 11.31 4.73 0.66
39. 9.81 4.13 1.07 11.57 4.86 0.64
40. 8.36 3.89 1 11.98 4.88 0.66
41. 8.53 3.46 0.99 12.11 4.2 0.75
42. 8.26 3.73 1.28 12.85 4.87 0.61
43. 9.36 4.04 1.12 11.93 6.2 0.59
44. 8.3 3.65 1.17 11.3 5.72 0.93
45. 8.04 3.62 1.2 11.02 4.88 0.8
46. 8.18 4.01 1.31 11.16 4.69 0.85
47. 7.91 3.52 1.34 10.08 3.92 0.72
48. 8.07 3.64 1.12 11.14 4.59 0.6
49. 7.45 3.23 1.3 11.54 5.22 0.75
50. 9.35 3.8 1.03 11.86 4.85 0.68
Table:1(h) Dimensional value of flaked rice (IGKV R2)
S. No. Thick size Thin size
Length Width Thickness Length Width Thickness
1. 9.71 3.23 1.11 15.27 5.62 0.53
2. 8.49 2.93 1.28 16.57 5.61 0.45
3. 9.1 2.69 1.23 15.6 5.56 0.5
4. 8.89 2.67 1.04 13.31 4.58 0.64
5. 10.46 3.26 1.06 15.73 5.51 0.69
6. 9.03 3.25 1.23 14.13 5.57 0.65
7. 8.82 3.38 0.99 16.71 4.99 0.59
8. 10.4 3.34 1.03 15.06 5.55 0.5
9. 9.71 3.17 1.04 11.82 4.39 0.65
10. 9.67 2.85 1.17 13.9 5.32 0.61
11. 9.42 3.34 1.08 16.3 5.45 0.63
12. 8.75 3.35 1.2 13.97 5.37 0.47
13. 8.88 2.76 1.18 13.25 4.76 0.66
14. 8.95 3.45 1.12 16.08 5.02 0.67
15. 8.62 2.58 1.5 14.15 5.47 0.61
16. 9.77 3.4 1.07 14.08 5.27 0.53
17. 9.24 3.33 0.95 14.84 4.82 0.61
18. 8.01 3.37 1.38 16.67 5.39 0.56
19. 9.16 2.96 1.24 13.92 4.62 0.69
20. 8.72 2.92 1.17 13.11 5.54 0.83
21. 9.15 3.27 1.13 12.21 4.43 0.77
22. 10.39 3.57 0.71 13.29 4.28 0.87
23. 9.42 3.22 1.08 13.38 4.09 0.85
24. 9.16 3.28 1.11 12.7 4.53 0.94
25. 8.81 2.8 1.16 12.22 3.79 0.82
26. 9.05 2.58 1.46 16.58 5.6 0.44
27. 10.19 2.91 1.1 14.2 4.9 0.48
28. 9.36 3.38 1.23 14.15 4.73 0.6
29. 8.94 2.98 1.45 15.52 4.95 0.51
30. 10.09 3.04 1.08 14.05 4.71 0.43
31. 9.92 3.56 0.87 15.72 5.28 0.51
32. 9.52 2.95 1.19 11.96 4.31 0.61
33. 9.38 3.2 1.16 14.26 4 0.6
34. 9.48 3.47 1.11 13.72 4.47 0.62
35. 10.19 3.31 0.85 12.3 4.35 0.72
36. 10.25 3.28 1.15 13.34 4.65 0.58
37. 10.5 3.52 1.07 16.57 5.62 0.44
38. 8.89 2.68 1.23 14.12 5.57 0.65
39. 8.39 3.36 1.3 13.9 5.32 0.61
40. 8.25 2.64 1.28 14.07 5.27 0.52
41. 9.32 3.03 1.33 13.92 4.62 0.69
42. 9.48 3.1 1.04 12.71 4.52 0.95
43. 8.68 2.88 1.3 16.57 5.6 0.45
44. 10.31 3.39 1.01 14.72 4.9 0.48
45. 8.72 2.93 1.4 15.53 4.94 0.52
46. 8.89 3.72 1.18 15.71 5.27 0.51
47. 9.15 3.13 1.16 14.13 5.57 0.66
48. 9.98 2.79 1.26 13.38 4.38 0.65
49. 9.53 3.6 1.19 11.82 4.31 0.63
50. 9.52 3.19 1.07 14.05 4.26 0.65
Table:1(i) Densities value of different variety of flaked rice
Varieties Mahamaya Barhasal IGKV R2
Bulk
Density
Thick
Rice
Avg. 0.70 0.68 0.65
Max. 0.75 0.72 0.68
Min. 0.66 0.64 0.62
S.D 0.02 0.02 0.02
Thin
Rice
Avg. 0.45 0.43 0.34
Max. 0.48 0.45 0.36
Min. 0.40 0.40 0.32
S.D 0.03 0.02 0.01
True
Density
Thick
Rice
Avg. 1.658 1.66 1.66
Max. 1.67 1.66 1.66
Min. 1.64 1.66 1.66
Thin
Rice
Avg. 1.52 1.66 1.66
Max. 1.66 1.66 1.66
Min. 1.01 1.66 1.66
Table:1(j) Dimensional value of parboiled rice and puffed rice (Mahamaya)
S. No. Parboiled Rice Puffed rice at different temperature (0C)
270 290 310
Length Width Length Width Length Width Length Width
1. 6.94 1.96 10.34 4.12 12.09 4.32 11.99 4.02
2. 6.65 1.9 7.27 3.76 11.42 4.43 11.97 4.04
3. 6.63 1.86 9.82 4.39 10.31 4.15 13.1 4.24
4. 6.66 1.84 11.16 3.97 10.68 4.08 11.78 4.14
5. 6.64 1.98 11 4.42 10.59 4.71 11.69 4.02
6. 6.38 1.9 9.62 4.47 10.84 4.45 11.79 4.23
7. 6.57 1.89 9.96 4.12 12 4.12 11.17 4.16
8. 6.4 1.93 9.83 3.8 11.1 3.47 11.88 4.08
9. 6.73 1.96 9.65 4.24 11.11 4.52 12.41 4.1
10. 6.87 1.92 9.61 4 11.99 4.06 11.69 4.02
11. 6.94 1.96 10.34 4.12 12.09 4.32 11.99 4.02
12. 6.65 1.9 7.27 3.76 11.42 4.43 11.97 4.04
13. 6.63 1.86 9.82 4.39 10.31 4.15 13.1 4.24
14. 6.66 1.84 11.16 3.97 10.68 4.08 11.78 4.14
15. 6.64 1.98 11 4.42 10.59 4.71 11.69 4.02
Table:1(k) Dimensional value of parboiled rice and puffed rice (Barhasal)
S. No. Parboiled Rice Puffed rice at different temperature (0C)
270 290 310
Length Width Length Width Length Width Length Width
1. 6.227 1.87 8.19 3.38 8.93 3.4 11.07 3.51
2. 6.55 1.72 8.14 3.45 8.19 3.11 9.44 3.98
3. 6.41 1.73 8.2 3.46 8.88 3.47 9.61 3.98
4. 6.19 1.93 7.64 3.45 9.08 3.4 10.34 3.79
5. 6.34 1.87 8.52 3.31 8.36 3.52 9.38 3.41
6. 6.4 1.84 7.35 3.23 8.96 3.38 9.55 3.59
7. 6.33 1.81 7.75 3.17 9.68 3.31 10.66 3.74
8. 6.19 1.87 8.06 3.54 8.62 3.55 9.53 3.6
9. 6.18 1.88 7.74 3.35 9.06 3.72 9.98 3.94
10. 6.3 1.77 7.64 3.11 8.98 3.59 10.14 3.98
11. 6.227 1.87 8.19 3.38 8.93 3.4 11.07 3.51
12. 6.55 1.72 8.14 3.45 8.19 3.11 9.44 3.98
13. 6.41 1.73 8.2 3.46 8.88 3.47 9.61 3.98
14. 6.19 1.93 7.64 3.45 9.08 3.4 10.34 3.79
15. 6.34 1.87 8.52 3.31 8.36 3.52 9.38 3.41
Table:1(l) Dimensional value of parboiled rice and puffed rice (IGKV R2)
S. No. Parboiled Rice Puffed rice at different temperature (0C)
270 290 310
Length Width Length Width Length Width Length Width
1. 6.27 1.77 10.94 3.62 11.85 3.76 11.24 4.18
2. 6.92 1.72 11.23 3.7 10.92 4.35 10.16 3.76
3. 6.07 1.69 11.25 3.69 11.49 3.8 10.64 3.78
4. 6.2 1.61 10.6 3.4 11.23 3.81 10.52 4.04
5. 6.55 1.87 11.64 3.7 10.75 3.76 10.23 4.27
6. 6.47 1.75 10.46 3.53 11.42 3.82 10.03 3.79
7. 6.69 1.78 10.5 3.56 10.71 3.82 11.58 4.33
8. 6.57 1.83 11.18 3.49 10.61 3.8 11.06 4.14
9. 6.81 1.75 11.28 3.8 9.79 3.54 11.11 3.96
10. 6.5 1.82 10.15 3.94 10.58 3.82 11.44 3.43
11. 6.27 1.77 10.94 3.62 11.85 3.76 11.24 4.18
12. 6.92 1.72 11.23 3.7 10.92 4.35 10.16 3.76
13. 6.07 1.69 11.25 3.69 11.49 3.8 10.64 3.78
14. 6.2 1.61 10.6 3.4 11.23 3.81 10.52 4.04
15. 6.55 1.87 11.64 3.7 10.75 3.76 10.23 4.27
Table:1(m) Puffing yield of different varieties of paddy at different temperature
(0C)
S.
No.
Yield at different temperature (0C)
Mahamaya Barhasal IGKV R2
270 290 310 270 290 310 270 290 310
1. 70.95 76 79.82 67.43 72.82 74.64 68.41 74.48 78.68
2. 70.9 75.98 79.78 67.38 72.75 74.55 68.38 74.4 78
3. 70.86 75.82 79.7 67.47 72.88 74.01 68.57 74.52 78.37
4. 70.88 76.06 79.23 66.95 72.73 74.49 67.96 74.58 78.59
5. 70.85 75.93 79.85 67.45 72.7 74.26 68.55 74 78.43
6. 70.96 75.87 79.55 67.08 72.84 74.42 68.52 74.4 78.73
7. 70.92 75.96 79 67.29 72.8 74.72 68.49 74.61 78.09
8. 70.89 76.01 79.47 67.17 72.76 74.63 67.94 74.37 78.72
9. 70.9 75.94 79.91 66.98 72.79 74.14 67.98 74.47 78.55
10. 70.87 75.92 79.33 66.96 72.83 74.38 68.37 74.55 78.1
Table: 1(n) Interviewed Poha Processors
S. No. Name of flaked and puffed rice processors and their address
1. Rajesh Poha Mill Bhatapara
2. Gyan Traders Matadevala Road
3. Goyal Poha Udyog Bhatapara
4. Ekka Poha Mill
5. Shivam Poha Industries Bhatapara
6. Yes Rahuja Poha And Murra Mill Dhamtari
7. Ankit Murmura Udyog Bhatapara
8. Ambe Udyog Murra Mill Abhanpur
9. Patel Murra Bhatti Gudhiyari Raipur
Appendix-B
Table:2 (a) individual CRD and Factorial CRD analysis of functional and
nutritional properties Data File Name : mbd1.csv
Result File Name : mbd1r
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: WAI (Thick) Year:
Total: 29.5000 General Mean: 4.9167 CV %: 1.48
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.003779 0.717 NS 0.0514
Error 3 0.005274
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 4.868 2 4.932 3 4.950
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: WAI Thin Year:
Total: 41.4900 General Mean: 6.9150 CV %: 1.71
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.028288 2.022 NS 0.0836
Error 3 0.013993
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 6.818 2 6.880 3 7.048
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: WSI (Thick) Year:
Total: 5.8450 General Mean: 0.9742 CV %: 8.00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.009654 1.590 NS 0.0551 -
Error 3 0.006071
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 1.025 2 1.002 3 0.895
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: WSI (Thin) Year:
Total: 4.0210 General Mean: 0.6702 CV %: 11.05
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.001730 0.316 NS 0.0524
Error 3 0.005484
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 0.663 2 0.645 3 0.702
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: SP (Thick) Year:
Total: 29.7620 General Mean: 4.9603 CV %: 1.46
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Treatment 2 0.002690 0.511 NS 0.0513 -
Error 3 0.005260
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 4.918 2 4.983 3 4.980
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: SP (Thin) Year:
Total: 41.7460 General Mean: 6.9577 CV %: 1.86
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 0.026243 1.560 NS 0.0917
Error 3 0.016819
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 6.863 2 6.925 3 7.085
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Water uptake (Thick) Year:
Total: 2525.0000 General Mean: 420.8333 CV %: 3.81
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 830.291667 3.230 NS 11.3376
Error 3 257.083333
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 400.500 2 420.750 3 441.250
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Water uptake (Thin) Year:
Total: 3849.5000 General Mean: 641.5833 CV %: 2.23
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment 2 32.291667 0.158 NS 10.1047
Error 3 204.208333
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat Mean
1 644.500 2 637.000 3 643.250
Data file name : f5.csv
Result file name : f5r
Experiment Name : volume expansion of puffed rice
Character: Location:
Year: VOL EXP
-------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
Treatment 8 4.890101 859.34748 ** 0.04
0.13
V 2 5.357265 941.44314 ** 0.03
0.07
T 2 12.141880 2133.71726 ** 0.03
0.07
VT 4 1.030630 181.11476 ** 0.04
0.13
Error 18 0.005690
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
Grand Total: 153.328600 General Mean: 5.678837 CV%
: 1.33
VT Mean Table
T 1 T 2 T 3 V
-------------------------------------------------------
V 1 5.1231 5.5485 7.6294 6.1003
V 2 3.3907 4.4012 6.5732 4.7884
V 3 5.6193 6.1261 6.6981 6.1478
-------------------------------------------------------
T 4.7110 5.3586 6.9669
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
Data file name : f1.csv
Result file name : f1r
Experiment Name : LENGTH EXPANSION of puffed rice
Character: Location:
Year: LENGTH EXPANSION
Sq.root transformation applied
----------------------------------------------------------
------------------
Source D F M S F Cal
S Em CD (5%)
----------------------------------------------------------
------------------
Treatment 8 0.291287 25.32893 **
0.03 0.10
V 2 0.635743 55.28121 **
0.02 0.06
T 2 0.329517 28.65324 **
0.02 0.06
VT 4 0.099944 8.69065 **
0.03 0.10
Error 81 0.011500
----------------------------------------------------------
------------------
Grand Total: 142.375000 General Mean:
1.581944 CV% : 6.78
VT Mean Table
T 1 T 2 T 3
V
-------------------------------------------------------
V 1 1.4790 1.6868 1.7984
1.6547
V 2 1.2554 1.4068 1.5808
1.4143
V 3 1.6815 1.6860 1.6628
1.6768
-------------------------------------------------------
T 1.4720 1.5932 1.6807
----------------------------------------------------------
------------------
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Amylose RICE Year:
Total: 138.3400 General Mean: 23.0567 CV %:
6.02
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 13.357182 6.930 NS 0.9817
-
Error 3 1.927497
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 25.840 2 24.56 3
20.18
MRDO FAT CONTENT
Data File Name : fat.csv
Result File Name : fatr
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: RICE Year:
Total: 8.7590 General Mean: 1.4598 CV %:
0.59
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.000550 7.489 NS 0.0061
-
Error 3 0.000073
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 1.446 2 1.478 3
1.456
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 270 Year:
Total: 5.9410 General Mean: 0.9902 CV %:
2.41
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.000375 0.661 NS 0.0168
-
Error 3 0.000568
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 0.978 2 0.988 3
1.005
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 290 Year:
Total: 5.8400 General Mean: 0.9733 CV %:
0.59
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.000017 0.500 NS 0.0041
-
Error 3 0.000033
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 0.975 2 0.975 3
0.970
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED AT 310 Year:
Total: 6.2000 General Mean: 1.0333 CV %:
4.77
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.014017 5.760 NS 0.0349
-
Error 3 0.002433
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 0.985 2 0.985 3
1.130
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THICK SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 5.9100 General Mean: 0.9850 CV %:
11.43
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.057050 4.498 NS 0.0796
-
Error 3 0.012683
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 1.085 2 1.080 3
0.790
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THIN SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 5.5800 General Mean: 0.9300 CV %:
8.26
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.054350 9.212 NS 0.0543
-
Error 3 0.005900
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 1.035 2 1.015 3
0.740
Data File Name : mm1.csv
Result File Name : mm1r
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Protein RICE Year:
Total: 45.5210 General Mean: 7.5868 CV %:
2.04
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 2.250925 94.002 ** 0.1094
0.49
Error 3 0.023946
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 6.708 2 8.766 3
7.286
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 270 Year:
Total: 42.4420 General Mean: 7.0737 CV %:
1.16
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 2.850796 420.616 ** 0.0582
0.26
Error 3 0.006778
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 6.038 2 8.379 3
6.803
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 290 Year:
Total: 43.8260 General Mean: 7.3043 CV %:
0.76
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 2.200403 718.184 ** 0.0391
0.18
Error 3 0.003064
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 6.458 2 8.478 3
6.977
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED AT 310 Year:
Total: 42.6900 General Mean: 7.1150 CV %:
0.82
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 2.034169 595.046 ** 0.0413
0.19
Error 3 0.003419
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 6.231 2 8.214 3
6.901
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THICK SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 42.8780 General Mean: 7.1463 CV %:
0.27
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 4.107708 10919.682 ** 0.0137
0.06
Error 3 0.000376
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 5.658 2 8.517 3
7.264
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THIN SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 42.0240 General Mean: 7.0040 CV %:
0.97
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 3.442560 747.306 ** 0.0480
0.22
Error 3 0.004607
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 5.592 2 8.184 3
7.236
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Ash Content RICE Year:
Total: 3.0070 General Mean: 0.5012 CV %:
9.64
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.012191 5.224 NS 0.0342
-
Error 3 0.002334
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 0.467 2 0.590 3
0.446
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 270 Year:
Total: 23.0820 General Mean: 3.8470 CV %:
1.09
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.970925 548.445 ** 0.0298
0.13
Error 3 0.001770
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 3.419 2 3.470 3
4.651
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 290 Year:
Total: 25.0350 General Mean: 4.1725 CV %:
1.79
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.322554 57.877 ** 0.0528
0.24
Error 3 0.005573
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 3.902 2 3.981 3
4.634
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED AT 310 Year:
Total: 22.4840 General Mean: 3.7473 CV %:
6.82
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.568111 8.690 NS 0.1808
-
Error 3 0.065378
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 3.154 2 3.902 3
4.186
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THICK SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 20.8720 General Mean: 3.4787 CV %:
35.92
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 1.291120 0.827 NS 0.8836
-
Error 3 1.561538
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 2.553 2 3.996 3
3.888
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THIN SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 6.8350 General Mean: 1.1392 CV %:
5.24
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.932453 261.714 ** 0.0422
0.19
Error 3 0.003563
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 0.588 2 1.903 3
0.927
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Fat content RICE mbd
Year:
Total: 6.8410 General Mean: 1.1402 CV %:
0.44
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.139855 5627.540 ** 0.0035
0.02
Error 3 0.000025
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 1.446 2 0.990 3
0.985
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 270 Year:
Total: 5.4060 General Mean: 0.9010 CV %:
0.44
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.018278 1139.808 ** 0.0028
0.01
Error 3 0.000016
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 0.978 2 0.931 3
0.794
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 290 Year:
Total: 5.4000 General Mean: 0.9000 CV %:
1.11
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.025550 255.509 ** 0.0071
0.03
Error 3 0.000100
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 0.975 2 0.955 3
0.770
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED AT 310 Year:
Total: 5.4600 General Mean: 0.9100 CV %:
0.63
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.027450 823.925 ** 0.0041
0.02
Error 3 0.000033
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 0.985 2 0.970 3
0.775
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THICK SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 5.7100 General Mean: 0.9517 CV %:
8.15
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.044717 7.432 NS 0.0548
-
Error 3 0.006017
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 1.085 2 0.980 3
0.790
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THIN SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 5.5400 General Mean: 0.9233 CV %:
5.83
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.037717 13.006 * 0.0381
0.17
Error 3 0.002900
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
* Significant at 5% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 1.035 2 0.965 3
0.770
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Moisture RICE Year:
Total: 72.9000 General Mean: 12.1500 CV %:
0.51
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.076950 19.721 * 0.0442
0.20
Error 3 0.003902
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
* Significant at 5% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 12.285 2 11.925 3
12.240
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 270 Year:
Total: 43.0800 General Mean: 7.1800 CV %:
1.73
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 1.722350 111.136 ** 0.0880
0.40
Error 3 0.015498
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 6.490 2 8.235 3
6.815
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED 290 Year:
Total: 43.6400 General Mean: 7.2733 CV %:
0.99
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 2.256867 434.181 ** 0.0510
0.23
Error 3 0.005198
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 6.800 2 8.490 3
6.530
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: PUFFED AT 310 Year:
Total: 40.1100 General Mean: 6.6850 CV %:
1.51
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 2.074200 203.710 ** 0.0714
0.32
Error 3 0.010182
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 5.775 2 7.785 3
6.495
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THICK SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 41.4500 General Mean: 6.9083 CV %:
2.66
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.411717 12.223 * 0.1298
0.58
Error 3 0.033684
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
* Significant at 5% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 6.555 2 7.420 3
6.750
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: THIN SIZE FLAKES Year:
Total: 42.2300 General Mean: 7.0383 CV %:
1.36
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 0.668717 73.101 ** 0.0676
0.30
Error 3 0.009148
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 6.630 2 7.700 3
6.785
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Amylopectin RICE Year:
Total: 454.1060 General Mean: 75.6843 CV %:
2.32
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 35.315874 11.453 * 1.2417
5.59
Error 3 3.083635
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
* Significant at 5% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 74.160 2 80.436 3
72.458
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: RICE starch Year:
Total: 452.9050 General Mean: 75.4842 CV %:
1.20
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 8.280631 10.086 * 0.6407
2.88
Error 3 0.821028
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
* Significant at 5% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 75.783 2 73.316 3
77.353
Data File Name : mm2.csv
Result File Name : mm2r
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Amyslose RICE Year:
Total: 34.0000 General Mean: 3.7778 CV %:
8.82
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 33.444444 301.000 ** 0.1925
0.67
Error 6 0.111111
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 0.000 2 6.333 3
5.000
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Year:
Total: 550.5000 General Mean: 61.1667 CV %:
1.12
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 8583.083333 18175.941 ** 0.3967
1.37
Error 6 0.472222
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
** Significant at 1% level
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 0.000 2 99.167 3
84.333
INDIVIDUAL CRD ANALYSIS
Experiment Title :
Character: Year:
Total: 165.8300 General Mean: 18.4256 CV %:
49.81
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Source D F M S F Cal S Em
CD (5%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Treatment 2 225.665500 2.680 NS 5.2984
-
Error 6 84.219224
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
NS Non significant
MEAN TABLE
Treat Mean Treat Mean Treat
Mean
1 8.418 2 23.092 3
23.766
Data file name : f2.csv
Result file name : f2r
Experiment Name :
Character: Location:
Year: WIDTH EXPANSION
Sq.root transformation applied
----------------------------------------------------------
------------------
Source D F M S F Cal
S Em CD (5%)
----------------------------------------------------------
------------------
Treatment 8 0.212008 11.37817 **
0.04 0.12
V 2 0.610428 32.76072 **
0.02 0.07
T 2 0.133489 7.16418 **
0.02 0.07
VT 4 0.052058 2.79389 *
0.04 0.12
Error 81 0.018633
----------------------------------------------------------
------------------
Grand Total: 187.993000 General Mean:
2.088811 CV% : 6.53
VT Mean Table
T 1 T 2 T 3
V
-------------------------------------------------------
V 1 2.1579 2.2104 2.1464
2.1716
V 2 1.8309 1.8847 2.0567
1.9241
V 3 2.0730 2.1807 2.2586
2.1708
-------------------------------------------------------
T 2.0206 2.0919 2.1539
----------------------------------------------------------
------------------
Table 2 (b) Sensory Evaluation formats and instructions for flaked rice and puffed
rice
Sensory Evaluation
Date……………… Name of person……………
Product M1 M2 M3 D1 D2 D3 B1 B2 B3
Appearance
Colour
Texture
Taste
Mouth feel
Flavor
Overall
acceptability
Taste all samples and check how you like or dislike each one. Use the appropriate
scale to show
your attitude by checking at the point that describes your feeling about the samples.
Hedonic scale
1. Extremely dislike
2. Very much dislike
3. Moderately dislike
4. Slightly dislike
5. Neither like nor dislike
6. Slightly like
7. Moderately like
8. Very much like
9. Extremely like
Sensory Evaluation of flaked rice
Date……………… Name of person……………
Product M1 M2 M3 DI D2 D3 B1 B2 B3
Appearance
Colour
Texture
Taste
Mouth feel
Flavor
Overall
acceptability
Taste all samples and check how you like or dislike each one. Use the appropriate
scale to show
your attitude by checking at the point that describes your feeling about the samples.
Hedonic scale
1. Extremely dislike
2. Very much dislike
3. Moderately dislike
4. Slightly dislike
5. Neither like nor dislike
6. Slightly like
7. Moderately like
8. Very much like
9. Extremely like