Differences between Easy‐ and Difficult‐To‐Mill Chickpea (<i>Cicer arietinum</i> L.) Genotypes. Part I: Broad Chemical Composition

Wood, J.D.; Knights, E. J.; Campbell, Grant M.; Choct, Mingan

doi:10.1002/jsfa.6928

Cited by 16 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As previously reported (Wood et al 2008(Wood et al , 2012(Wood et al , 2014a, the milling protocol involved passing nonconditioned seed through the sheller component of a mill (S.K. Amethyst and 90101-57Q were easy to mill (Amethyst being the easiest), whereas 9105-33 N was difficult to mill, and the kabuli chickpea (Bumper) did not mill successfully and hence was classified as very difficult to mill (Wood et al 2008(Wood et al , 2014a. Dehulling efficiency and splitting yield were calculated according to APQ-104.2: Rapid Dehulling of Field Peas and Desi Chickpeas (Burridge et al 2001).…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 74%

“…As previously reported (Wood et al 2008(Wood et al , 2012(Wood et al , 2014a, the milling protocol involved passing nonconditioned seed through the sheller component of a mill (S.K. As previously reported (Wood et al 2008(Wood et al , 2012(Wood et al , 2014a, the milling protocol involved passing nonconditioned seed through the sheller component of a mill (S.K.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Differences in chemical composition between easy-and difficult-tomill chickpeas have been published previously (Wood et al 2014a(Wood et al , 2014b(Wood et al , 2014c(Wood et al , 2014d. Differences in chemical composition between easy-and difficult-tomill chickpeas have been published previously (Wood et al 2014a(Wood et al , 2014b(Wood et al , 2014c(Wood et al , 2014d.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Topography of the Cotyledon Surfaces and Adjoining Seed Coat of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Genotypes Differing in Milling Performance

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cereal Chem. 94(1):104-109Milling of pulse seeds generally refers to dehulling (decortication or seed coat removal) and splitting (division of the two cotyledons) to produce split seeds, known as dhal. Reduction of whole seeds or dhal to flour, in comparison, is generally termed "grinding" for pulses. Many pulses are consumed as dhal, including desi chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.), faba bean (Vicia faba L.), lentil (Lens culinaris L.), field pea (Pisum sativum L.), pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan L.), mungbean (Vigna radiata L.), black gram (Vigna mungo L.), and hyacinth bean (Lablab purpureus L.). Hence, ease-of-milling is an important quality attribute of pulse species that are commonly dehulled or split prior to consumption. Seed structure and the surface topography at the junctions between seed coat and cotyledons have the potential to influence the varietal differences observed in the ease of milling. The epicuticular wax surfaces of six genotypes of chickpea differing in ease of milling were examined by scanning electron microscopy to evaluate whether the physical attributes of seed coat and cotyledon surfaces could be involved in adhesion. Differing epicuticular wax patterns were observed for each of the six genotypes. The possible roles these patterns play in genotypic differences in ease of milling are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 74%

“…As previously reported (Wood et al 2008(Wood et al , 2012(Wood et al , 2014a, the milling protocol involved passing nonconditioned seed through the sheller component of a mill (S.K. As previously reported (Wood et al 2008(Wood et al , 2012(Wood et al , 2014a, the milling protocol involved passing nonconditioned seed through the sheller component of a mill (S.K.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 86%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Topography of the Cotyledon Surfaces and Adjoining Seed Coat of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Genotypes Differing in Milling Performance

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Seed coats are high in fibrous components such as cellulose, hemicelluloses, and lignin (Bhatty 1995;Wood et al 2014) and are protected by a cuticle (Bushey 2001). Pulses are cooked and consumed in different forms.…”

Section: Cooking Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Cooking Time in Pulses: A Review

Wood

2016

Cereal Chem

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cereal Chem. 94(1):32-48Pulses are most commonly consumed after cooking. Those that require long cooking times are less convenient, more energy consuming, and, therefore, less desirable for consumers and processors. Pulse breeding programs are interested in breeding for quicker-cooking pulse varieties but, there is no standard method for the evaluation of cooking time. The major direct measures used to evaluate cooking time include sensory analysis, tactile method, spread area ratio, Mattson bean cooker, white core method, and glass slides method. However, each method has limitations, and methodology parameters were found to vary greatly between studies. Cooking time is also affected by the seed coat and whether the seed was presoaked. Authors' definitions of "cooked" and the percentage of seeds required to attain this designation also varied. Within-sample variability of pulse samples creates additional complexity in the evaluation of whole seeds. Several indirect predictive estimators of relative cooking time from the literature are also outlined and discussed. The biggest limitation of these potential predictive methods is the lack of a reliable reference method for validation. This review critically examines each direct cooking time methodology, potential predictive methods, and the scientific challenges in determining the cooking time of pulse samples.

show abstract

“…The chemical composition of whole seeds from chickpea and other pulses has been reported in a number of studies (Petterson, Sipsas, & Mackintosh, ; Rincón & Martínez, ; de Almeida Costa, da Silva Queiroz‐Monici, Reis, & de Oliveira, ; Nikolopoulou, Grigorakis, Stasini, Alexis, & Iliadis, ; Zia‐Ul‐Haq et al, ; Wang, Hatcher, Tyler, Toews, & Gawalko, ; Wood et al, ‐d; Ghribi, Maklouf, Blecker, Attia, & Besbes, ). However, because desi chickpea are predominantly dehulled before further processing and consumption, the whole seed composition is less relevant as it is significantly influenced by the seed coat.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Genetic and environmental factors contribute to variation in cell wall composition in mature desi chickpea (Cicer arietinumL.) cotyledons

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is an important nutritionally rich legume crop that is consumed worldwide. Prior to cooking, desi chickpea seeds are most often dehulled and cleaved to release the split cotyledons, referred to as dhal. Compositional variation between desi genotypes has a significant impact on nutritional quality and downstream processing, and this has been investigated mainly in terms of starch and protein content. Studies in pulses such as bean and lupin have also implicated cell wall polysaccharides in cooking time variation, but the underlying relationship between desi chickpea cotyledon composition and cooking performance remains unclear. Here, we utilized a variety of chemical and immunohistological assays to examine details of polysaccharide composition, structure, abundance, and location within the desi chickpea cotyledon. Pectic polysaccharides were the most abundant cell wall components, and differences in monosaccharide and glycosidic linkage content suggest both environmental and genetic factors contribute to cotyledon composition. Genotype-specific differences were identified in arabinan structure, pectin methylesterification, and calcium-mediated pectin dimerization. These differences were replicated in distinct field sites and suggest a potentially important role for cell wall polysaccharides and their underlying regulatory machinery in the control of cooking time in chickpea.

show abstract

Differences between Easy‐ and Difficult‐To‐Mill Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Genotypes. Part I: Broad Chemical Composition

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

Topography of the Cotyledon Surfaces and Adjoining Seed Coat of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Genotypes Differing in Milling Performance

Topography of the Cotyledon Surfaces and Adjoining Seed Coat of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Genotypes Differing in Milling Performance

Evaluation of Cooking Time in Pulses: A Review

Genetic and environmental factors contribute to variation in cell wall composition in mature desi chickpea (Cicer arietinumL.) cotyledons

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About