Varietal Difference of Eating Quality on Different Milling Degree in Japonica Rice

Abstract

Varietal difference of eating quality by milling degree was investigated for total nine rice varieties comprised of three varieties each as excellent, good, and normal according to sensory evaluation results of cooked rice. Nine varieties were analyzed for their physicochemical properties and for the sensory evaluation according to five different degree of milling(5.5∼13.5% based on brown rice). Overall score obtained through sensory evaluation was found the best in the milling degree at 9.5% and 11.5%. The overall score by rice variety was categorized into type A that showed high score at milling degree 9.5%, type B at milling degree 11.5%, and similar type C at both milling degrees 9.5% and 11.5%. The best eating quality was observed in Ilmibyeo and Koshihikari having overall eating quality excellent at milling degree 9.5% and in Chucheongbyeo and Dongjinbyeo having overall eating quality good at milling degree 11.5%. While, Palgongbyeo and Nonghobyeo having eating quality normal showed the best eating quality at milling degree 9.5% and 11.5%. Correlation analysis between overall score and physicochemical properties and five sensory evaluation items by three types of rice showed that Mg content and stickiness of type A, protein content and taste of type B, and K content and appearance of type C were highly significant correlation on overall score by panel test. Therefore, Mg contents might have affected on the stickiness of cooked rice in type A, protein contents on the taste in type B, and K contents on the appearance in type C, respectively.

Study on Major Disease-insect Incidence of Scented Gobindabhog Rice in New Alluvial Zone of West Bengal

“…Rice blast development is intimately related to meteorological factors that include air temperature, accumulated rainfall, and amount of sunshine kang [9][10][11][12]. The blast lesions observed on Gobindabhog rice plants were found to increase from 28 DAT to 84 DAT during both years of investigation (Table 3).…”