Physicochemical Properties and Malting Potential of New Canadian Hulless Barley Genotypes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interest in malting hulless barley (HB) is driven by its potential to produce very high levels of malt extract, but elevated levels of wort ß-glucan and insufficient levels of enzymes in hulless malt have prevented its widespread use. The objective of this study was to highlight the recent advancements in quality improvement of Canadian HB for malting purposes. Five advanced HB lines were evaluated for various barley and malt quality characteristics. All hulless lines exhibited lower grain hardness and slightly lower kernel weight and diameter compared to AAC Synergy (a popular two-rowed covered Canadian variety). The average total starch content of the hulless barley lines (64.2%) was significantly higher than AAC Synergy (59.9%) but slightly lower than that of CDC Clear (65.1%). Despite the low friability values, HB malts had a crumbly texture with good solubility and enzyme accessibility resulting in ample production of fermentable sugars. The average chain length of starch hydrolysis products in wort of new HB lines was similar to that of AAC Synergy, indicating sufficient enzyme activities and a highly effective hydrolysis. The fine-grind extract levels from hulless malt were on average 8% higher than from AAC Synergy, and several new HB lines exceeded the level of CDC Clear extract by 0.7–1.0%. Compared to CDC Clear, the new HB lines showed a significant reduction in concentration of wort ß-glucans. The concentration and the average degree of polymerization of arabinoxylo-oligosaccharides in wort of HB lines were generally higher than in wort of AAC Synergy, partly explaining the higher viscosity of HB worts. In general, the recently developed HB lines exhibited excellent malting potential with significant improvements in the levels of malt enzymes, concentration of free amino nitrogen compounds, and β-glucans in wort.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".