Swelling Index of Glutenin Test. I. Method and Comparison with Sedimentation, Gel‐Protein, and Insoluble Glutenin Tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Molecular weight distribution of wheat proteins is primarily responsible for the viscoelastic properties of flour dough. Furthermore, the amount of SDS insoluble proteins (mainly high molecular weight glutenin) plays the major role. We have developed a simple test to determine the swelling power of glutenin (swelling index of glutenin or SIG) for predicting dough properties and end‐use quality. Flour samples (40 mg) were hydrated in distilled water and then allowed to swell in nonreducing solvents (SDS, lactic acid, or mixtures of the two) followed by low speed centrifugation. The SIG was calculated as the weight of the residue divided by the original sample weight. The SIG test was compared with the results from other small‐scale tests for 20 flour samples. SIG tests showed highly significant correlations with the gel protein and insoluble glutenin test (r ≥ 0.85, r ≥ 0.93, P < 0.001, respectively) and significant correlations with SDS and Zeleny sedimentation tests (r ≥ 0.74, r ≥ 0.72, P < 0.001, respectively). The swelling capacity of glutenin depended on swelling time and mixing intensity in nonreducing solvents. Swelling curves obtained from SIG values versus different swelling time can be divided into three distinct stages: swelling, swollen, and breakdown. These stages may reflect soluble and insoluble glutenin contents and quality among different cultivars. SIG test values for short swelling time and low mixing intensity were significantly correlated to gel protein content and SDS‐sedimentation values (r = 0.96, r = 0.90, P < 0.001, respectively). SIG test values for long swelling time and high mixing intensity were significantly correlated to insoluble glutenin content (r = 0.96, P < 0.001). The difference of swelling condition (time and mixing intensity) among these small‐scale methods is the reason for their different correlations with insoluble glutenin content. Because large numbers of samples can be analyzed in a short time with excellent reproducibility, the SIG test may be a useful screening test in a breeding program, predicting the quantity and quality of insoluble glutenin.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".