Skip to main content
ARS Home » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #193730
Title: NOTE: COMPARISON OF METHODS FOR GLUTEN STRENGTH ASSESSMENT

Author
item Gaines, Charles
item REID, FREGEAU - AG. & AGRI-FOOD, CANADA
item KANT, VANDER - WG THOMPSON, ONTARIO
item Morris, Craig

Submitted to: Cereal Chemistry
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 1/4/2006
Publication Date: 5/15/2006
Citation: Gaines, C.S., Reid, F.J., Kant, V.C., Morris, C.F. 2006. Note: comparison of methods for gluten strength assessment. Cereal Chemistry. p. 284-286.

Interpretive Summary: There is no one standard method accepted by chemists that evaluates the strength of wheat gluden. Various methods are used but they give different results. Therefore, five methods were compared using 33 North American soft red and white wheats. The three methods analyzed flour and two methods employed ground wheat meal. We combined all of the data to produce a benchmark combined assessment and then compared the results of each method against the benchmark values for each flour. The ability of each assessment method to evaluate gluten quality decreased in the order: Alveograph work, lactic acid solvent retention capacity, mixograph peak time, Glutomaatic gluten index, and sodium dodecyl sulfate SDS sedimentation volume. The methods utilizing flour were substantially superior predictive methods, however, the two meal-based methods could be sufficient for early generation screening by wheat breeders and flour quality evaluators when flour is not available.

Technical Abstract: Five methods that employed very different testing principles and procedures for assessing gluten quality were compared for 33 North American soft red and white wheats. The three methods analyzed flour (Alveograph work, lactic acid solvent retention capacity, and mixograph peak time) and two methods employed ground wheat meal (Glutomatic gluten index and sodium dodecyl sulfate sedimentation volume). Compared against the normalized mean of all five assessments, the ability of the assessment methods to evaluate gluten quality decreased in the order: Alveograph work, lactic acid solvent retention capacity, mixograph peak time, Glutomatic gluten index, and sodium dodecyl sulfate SDS sedimentation volume. The methods utilizing flour were substantially superior predictive methods, however, the two meal-based methods could be sufficient for early generation screening when flour is not available.