M. Tech. (Agril. Engg.) Thesis by Lalit Kumar · It is by the blessings of the almighty, that I...

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


3.12.2 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


3.12.7 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


4.2.2 Length, width and thickness


4.2.4 Sphericity

4.2.5 Aspect ratio

4.2.6 Surface area

4.2.7 Bulk density and true density


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


4.5.2 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


4.6.2 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.


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).


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).


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


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


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


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


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.


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


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.


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.


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


Fig. 4.14: Effect of moisture content on hulling and milling

Parameters No. of

observation


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


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


4.5 Physical, Functional and Nutritional Properties of Flaked Rice


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


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


Table 4.9 Functional properties of different varieties of flaked rice

Parameters Number

of

observation


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


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


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


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)


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)


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


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


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


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


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


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


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.

http://www.faostat.org/

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


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)



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)



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


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)


270 290 310


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)


270 290 310


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)


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


Experiment Title :

Character: WAI Thin Year:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Treatment 2 0.028288 2.022 NS 0.0836

Error 3 0.013993

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


1 6.818 2 6.880 3 7.048


Experiment Title :

Character: WSI (Thick) Year:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Treatment 2 0.009654 1.590 NS 0.0551 -

Error 3 0.006071

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


1 1.025 2 1.002 3 0.895


Experiment Title :

Character: WSI (Thin) Year:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Treatment 2 0.001730 0.316 NS 0.0524

Error 3 0.005484

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


1 0.663 2 0.645 3 0.702


Experiment Title :

Character: SP (Thick) Year:


---------------------------------------------------------------------------

--


---------------------------------------------------------------------------

--

Treatment 2 0.002690 0.511 NS 0.0513 -

Error 3 0.005260

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

--

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


1 4.918 2 4.983 3 4.980


Experiment Title :

Character: SP (Thin) Year:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Treatment 2 0.026243 1.560 NS 0.0917

Error 3 0.016819

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


1 6.863 2 6.925 3 7.085


Experiment Title :

Character: Water uptake (Thick) Year:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Treatment 2 830.291667 3.230 NS 11.3376

Error 3 257.083333

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


1 400.500 2 420.750 3 441.250


Experiment Title :

Character: Water uptake (Thin) Year:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Treatment 2 32.291667 0.158 NS 10.1047

Error 3 204.208333

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


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

--------------------------------------------------------------------

--------



Experiment Name : LENGTH EXPANSION of puffed rice


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

----------------------------------------------------------

------------------


Experiment Title :

Character: Amylose RICE Year:

Total: 138.3400 General Mean: 23.0567 CV %:

6.02

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


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


Experiment Title :

Character: RICE Year:


0.59

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.000550 7.489 NS 0.0061

-

Error 3 0.000073

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 1.446 2 1.478 3

1.456


Experiment Title :

Character: PUFFED 270 Year:


2.41

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.000375 0.661 NS 0.0168

-

Error 3 0.000568

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 0.978 2 0.988 3

1.005


Experiment Title :



0.59

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.000017 0.500 NS 0.0041

-

Error 3 0.000033

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 0.975 2 0.975 3

0.970


Experiment Title :

Character: PUFFED AT 310 Year:


4.77

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.014017 5.760 NS 0.0349

-

Error 3 0.002433

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 0.985 2 0.985 3

1.130


Experiment Title :

Character: THICK SIZE FLAKES Year:


11.43

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.057050 4.498 NS 0.0796

-

Error 3 0.012683

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 1.085 2 1.080 3

0.790


Experiment Title :

Character: THIN SIZE FLAKES Year:


8.26

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.054350 9.212 NS 0.0543

-

Error 3 0.005900

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 1.035 2 1.015 3

0.740

Data File Name : mm1.csv

Result File Name : mm1r


Experiment Title :

Character: Protein RICE Year:


2.04

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 2.250925 94.002 ** 0.1094

0.49

Error 3 0.023946

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

** Significant at 1% level

MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 6.708 2 8.766 3

7.286


Experiment Title :



1.16

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 2.850796 420.616 ** 0.0582

0.26

Error 3 0.006778

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 6.038 2 8.379 3

6.803


Experiment Title :



0.76

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 2.200403 718.184 ** 0.0391

0.18

Error 3 0.003064

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 6.458 2 8.478 3

6.977


Experiment Title :



0.82

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 2.034169 595.046 ** 0.0413

0.19

Error 3 0.003419

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 6.231 2 8.214 3

6.901


Experiment Title :



0.27

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 4.107708 10919.682 ** 0.0137

0.06

Error 3 0.000376

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 5.658 2 8.517 3

7.264


Experiment Title :



0.97

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 3.442560 747.306 ** 0.0480

0.22

Error 3 0.004607

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 5.592 2 8.184 3

7.236


Experiment Title :

Character: Ash Content RICE Year:


9.64

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.012191 5.224 NS 0.0342

-

Error 3 0.002334

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 0.467 2 0.590 3

0.446


Experiment Title :



1.09

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.970925 548.445 ** 0.0298

0.13

Error 3 0.001770

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 3.419 2 3.470 3

4.651


Experiment Title :



1.79

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.322554 57.877 ** 0.0528

0.24

Error 3 0.005573

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 3.902 2 3.981 3

4.634


Experiment Title :



6.82

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.568111 8.690 NS 0.1808

-

Error 3 0.065378

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 3.154 2 3.902 3

4.186


Experiment Title :



35.92

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 1.291120 0.827 NS 0.8836

-

Error 3 1.561538

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 2.553 2 3.996 3

3.888


Experiment Title :



5.24

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.932453 261.714 ** 0.0422

0.19

Error 3 0.003563

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 0.588 2 1.903 3

0.927


Experiment Title :

Character: Fat content RICE mbd

Year:


0.44

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.139855 5627.540 ** 0.0035

0.02

Error 3 0.000025

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 1.446 2 0.990 3

0.985


Experiment Title :



0.44

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.018278 1139.808 ** 0.0028

0.01

Error 3 0.000016

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 0.978 2 0.931 3

0.794


Experiment Title :



1.11

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.025550 255.509 ** 0.0071

0.03

Error 3 0.000100

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 0.975 2 0.955 3

0.770


Experiment Title :



0.63

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.027450 823.925 ** 0.0041

0.02

Error 3 0.000033

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 0.985 2 0.970 3

0.775


Experiment Title :



8.15

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.044717 7.432 NS 0.0548

-

Error 3 0.006017

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 1.085 2 0.980 3

0.790


Experiment Title :



5.83

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.037717 13.006 * 0.0381

0.17

Error 3 0.002900

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

* Significant at 5% level

MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 1.035 2 0.965 3

0.770


Experiment Title :

Character: Moisture RICE Year:


0.51

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.076950 19.721 * 0.0442

0.20

Error 3 0.003902

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 12.285 2 11.925 3

12.240


Experiment Title :



1.73

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 1.722350 111.136 ** 0.0880

0.40

Error 3 0.015498

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 6.490 2 8.235 3

6.815


Experiment Title :



0.99

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 2.256867 434.181 ** 0.0510

0.23

Error 3 0.005198

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 6.800 2 8.490 3

6.530


Experiment Title :



1.51

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 2.074200 203.710 ** 0.0714

0.32

Error 3 0.010182

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 5.775 2 7.785 3

6.495


Experiment Title :



2.66

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.411717 12.223 * 0.1298

0.58

Error 3 0.033684

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 6.555 2 7.420 3

6.750


Experiment Title :



1.36

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 0.668717 73.101 ** 0.0676

0.30

Error 3 0.009148

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 6.630 2 7.700 3

6.785


Experiment Title :

Character: Amylopectin RICE Year:


2.32

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 35.315874 11.453 * 1.2417

5.59

Error 3 3.083635

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 74.160 2 80.436 3

72.458


Experiment Title :

Character: RICE starch Year:


1.20

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 8.280631 10.086 * 0.6407

2.88

Error 3 0.821028

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 75.783 2 73.316 3

77.353

Data File Name : mm2.csv

Result File Name : mm2r


Experiment Title :

Character: Amyslose RICE Year:


8.82

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 33.444444 301.000 ** 0.1925

0.67

Error 6 0.111111

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 0.000 2 6.333 3

5.000


Experiment Title :

Character: Year:


1.12

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 8583.083333 18175.941 ** 0.3967

1.37

Error 6 0.472222

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 0.000 2 99.167 3

84.333


Experiment Title :

Character: Year:


49.81

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------


CD (5%)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

Treatment 2 225.665500 2.680 NS 5.2984

-

Error 6 84.219224

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------

NS Non significant

MEAN TABLE


Mean

1 8.418 2 23.092 3

23.766



Experiment Name :


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

M. Tech. (Agril. Engg.) Thesis by Lalit Kumar · It is by the blessings of the almighty, that I...

Documents

Transcript of M. Tech. (Agril. Engg.) Thesis by Lalit Kumar · It is by the blessings of the almighty, that I...