Effect of bicarbonate soaking on dehusking efficiency and composition of pigeon pea (<i>Cajanus cajan</i> L.) seeds and dhal

Saxena, R. P.; Chand, Laxmi; Garg, G. K.; Singh, Balraj

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2621.1989.tb00641.x

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Separation of husk, whole kernels, broken kernels, and mealy waste from the decorticated material (Figure ) were done manually. The performance parameters, that is, decortication efficiency and broken kernel percentage at particular experimental condition was calculated using the following relationship (Sahay & Singh, ; Saxena, Chand, Garg, & Singh, ; Surya Prakash, ):

η = true(1 - \frac{U_{normald}}{T_{normald}} true) true(\frac{K_{normalp}}{K_{normalp} + B_{normalr} + D_{normalo}} true)

where, η is the decortication efficiency (%); U d is the amount of undecorticated pits (g); T d is the total amount of pits fed for decortication (g); K p is the amount of kernels (g); B r is the amount of broken kernels (g); and D o is amount of decortication waste (g).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Separation of husk, whole kernels, broken kernels, and mealy waste from the decorticated material ( Figure 2) were done manually. The performance parameters, that is, decortication efficiency and broken kernel percentage at particular experimental condition was calculated using the following relationship (Sahay & Singh, 2001;Saxena, Chand, Garg, & Singh, 2007;Surya Prakash, 2006):…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Development and testing of apricot (Prunus armeniaca. L) pit decorticator

Kate

Lohani

Shahi

2018

J Food Process Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Apricot (Prunus armeniaca. L) is an important stone fruit grown abundantly in the temperate climate. Traditionally, the fruit stone (pit), leftover part of fruit after utilizing apricot flesh, contains the apricot kernel. These kernels are currently being explored for the oil extraction purpose. Therefore, postharvest management and processing of the apricot pit are imperative along with its process mechanization. Manual decortication of apricot pit is tedious and laborious task. Hence, a small‐scale apricot pit decorticator machine was developed to mitigate all these issues. The machine works on the principle of breaking the pit by impact and compression forces produced by reciprocating piston. Performance of the decorticator was evaluated using dry wild apricot pits. The independent variables, namely, crankshaft speed (60–100 rpm), moisture content (8.5–16.5% wb), feed per stroke (10–18 g/stroke), and impact clearance (0–2 mm) were selected for testing of the decorticator. Decortication efficiency and broken kernel percentage were obtained in the range of 67.25–77.49% and 8.97–30.17%, respectively. The best performance of the decorticator for maximum decortication efficiency with minimum percentage of broken kernels were found to be at 85 rpm crankshaft speed, 15% (wb) moisture content, 18 g/stroke feed per stroke, and 0.8 mm impact clearance. Pay‐back period of the decorticator was found to be 0.48 years. Practical applications Apricot kernel present in pit is very fragile because of its softness and friability. Hence, it is very difficult to remove the outside husk mechanically without crushing or breaking the inside kernel. There is very high value of whole and quality kernels in dry fruits, confectioneries, medicine, and cosmetics. Various traditional methods are very tedious, laborious and uneconomical to the farmers and result in low quality unhygienic products. Therefore, a mechanized apricot pit decorticator working on the principle of impact and compression forces has been developed to solve the problem. The machine can decorticate pits easily with maximum decortication efficiency, minimum brokens, and reduced drudgery. The developed decorticator has potential for commercial production of kernels. It will increase the commercial application of kernels in dry fruits, confectionery, medicines, cosmetics, and further value additions.

show abstract

η = true(1 - \frac{U_{normald}}{T_{normald}} true) true(\frac{K_{normalp}}{K_{normalp} + B_{normalr} + D_{normalo}} true)

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and testing of apricot (Prunus armeniaca. L) pit decorticator

Kate

Lohani

Shahi

2018

J Food Process Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These usually involve the addition of water and/or oil and subsequent drying prior to the milling process 1,6,7 . Chemical agents investigated previously using laboratory scale mills include sodium bicarbonate, urea, acetic acid and alcohol 7‐11 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1,6,7 Chemical agents investigated previously using laboratory scale mills include sodium bicarbonate, urea, acetic acid and alcohol. [7][8][9][10][11] Several studies have investigated the use of enzymes as milling pre-treatments, particularly for pigeon pea, which is often difficult to mill. Enzyme pre-treatment was shown to improve pigeon pea dehulling efficiencies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enzyme pre‐milling treatments improved milling performance of chickpeas by targeting mechanisms of seed coat and cotyledon adhesion with various effects on dhal quality

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Dehulling and splitting are important elements of the milling process to produce dhal from pulses. However, grain that is difficult‐to‐mill because of tightly adhered seed coats or cotyledons that resist separation makes it difficult to achieve high quality dhal. Milling yields are reduced, energy inputs into the milling process are increased, and the resulting dhal can be of poorer quality, chipped or abraded. RESULTS Eight enzyme pre‐treatments were chosen based on the hypothesised mechanisms of seed coat and cotyledon adhesion established previously. Using a difficult‐to‐mill chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) genotype, we examined the effects of these pre‐treatments, over time, on laboratory‐scale milling performance and dhal quality. We pioneered a texture analyser method to measure the flex of the cotyledons and the force required to cleave the cotyledons. The enzyme‐induced changes ranged from negative (tough seed coat, weight loss, deleterious colour and texture, increased visual damage to cotyledons and increased kibble loss, concave cotyledons, increased flex, and changes in taste) to positive (brittle seed coat, increased seed volume, improved dehulling efficiency and splitting yield, reduced cotyledon cleavage force, and acceptable dhal quality and taste). CONCLUSION All pre‐treatments improved milling performance compared to milling the raw seed, although there was considerable variation between them. Two pre‐treatments showed no improvement in milling yields compared to the water control, and several pre‐treatments resulted in unacceptable qualities. Three pre‐treatments, endo‐polygalacturonanase, α‐galactosidase and cellulase, show potential for commercial milling applications and could assist pulse millers globally to achieve high quality dhal at the same time as minimising milling effort. © 2021 Society of Chemical Industry.

show abstract

“…However, it is difficult to compare results as the species, milling equipment and methodologies varied widely. Pre-treatments commonly examined have included water, various oils (palm, vegetable, coconut, castor, cottonseed, mustard, sunflower, groundnut, peanut, sesame) and chemical treatments (salt solutions, sodium carbonate, sodium bicarbonate, sodium hydroxide, acetic acid, vinegar and urea solutions) with variable success (Saxena et al, 1989;Erskine et al, 1991b;Phirke and Bhole, 2000;Mangaraj et al, 2005;Anton et al, 2008a;Tiwari et al, 2008). More recently, researchers have found promise in hydrothermal pre-treatment (Tiwari et al, 2010) and pre-treating with various enzymes (Phirke and Bhole, 2000;Sreerama et al, 2009;Wood, 2010).…”

Section: Manipulation Of Milling Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%