1 / 15

Quality parameters of wheat. Bi o- ethanol versus bread ?

6th ALPS-ADRIA SCIENTIFIC WORKSHOP 30 April - 5 May, 2007 Obervellach, Austria. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF SUSTAINABILITY. Quality parameters of wheat. Bi o- ethanol versus bread ?. Pál SZAKÁL 1 – Rezső SCHMIDT 1 – Juraj LESNY 2 – Renátó KALOCSAI 3 – Margit BARKÓCZI 1

hans
Télécharger la présentation

Quality parameters of wheat. Bi o- ethanol versus bread ?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 6th ALPS-ADRIA SCIENTIFIC WORKSHOP 30 April - 5 May, 2007 Obervellach, Austria ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF SUSTAINABILITY Quality parameters of wheat. Bio-ethanol versusbread? Pál SZAKÁL1 – Rezső SCHMIDT1 – Juraj LESNY2 – Renátó KALOCSAI3 – Margit BARKÓCZI1 1 University of West Hungary, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, Mosonmagyaróvár 2 Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of SS. Cyril and Methodius in Trnava, 917 01 Trnava, SK. 3 UIS Ungarn Laboratories, Mosonmagyaróvár

  2. Decrease of fossil energy carriers Bio-ethanol is a potential replacement of oil and natural gas The increasing importance of high-starch content plants (Wheat, maize) Bio-ethanol, bio polymers, dextrin, starch syrup, D-glucose, etc. EU’s cereal production 285 million tons; Hungary’s cereal production 6 million tons 1 l bio-ethanol appr. 3.1 kg wheat, 2.8 kg maize. (Maize germ)

  3. 6 H2O + 6 CO2 C6H12O6 (C6H10O5)n + n H2O nC6H12O6 C6H12O6 2CH3 – CH2 – OH + 2CO2 h amilase CH3 CH3 CH3 C – OH + HO – CH2 – CH3 = CH3 C – O – CH2 – CH3 CH3 CH3 ETBE

  4. Why to use bio-ethanol? • Environmental reasons. Glasshaouse effects, climate change. • Ceasing the dependance on crude oil.

  5. Starch, cellulose, inulin Saccharose containing materials (sugar beet, sorghum, etc.) STARCH Decomposition of starch (cooking with thermo stabile -amylase; Hydrolysis (gluco-amilase) GLUCOSE Fermentation ALCOHOL The production of bio-ethanol

  6. The alcohol production potential of different plants

  7. STARCH RAW PROTEIN, GLUTEN Aim: to increase the starch content of wheat for increasing bio- ethanol yield

  8. Material and methods Treatment: manganese carbohydrate Plant: winter wheat Phenological phase: booting Way of application: foliar Soil type: Danube alluvial, Darnózseli, Hungary Experiment: 10 m2 plots, 4 repetitions, randomised block design Doses: 0.05, 0.1, 0.3, 0.5 kgha-1 Mn

  9. Soil analysis results. Darnózseli 2005.

  10. The effect of the treatments on the yield TheMn-complexes increased the yield generally, the highest yield was measured at the 0.05 kgha-1 dose, at the higher doses the yield decreased. The lowest yield was measured at 0.5 kgha-1 Mn dose, the value was lower than that of the control. There was not any significant yield increase due to the treatments (LSD5% = 0.57).

  11. Raw protein content The manganese treatments decreased the protein content. We measured the lowest protein content at the Mn-dose of 0.05 kgha-1. The Mn-doses higher than this increased the protein content a little, but it was still lower than the protein content of the control.

  12. Starch content As a result of the treatments the starch content increased and at the 0.1 and 0.3 kgha-1 Mn-saccharose treatment the increase of the starch content was significant (LSD5% = 1.5).

  13. Conclusions • The lower doses of Mn-saccharose increased the yield. • The 0.05 kgha-1 increased the yield the most, but it still was not significant. • At the same time at this dose we measured the lowest (12.63 m%) raw protein content. • Due to the raising Mn-doses the starch content increased, compared to the control. This increase was significant in the case of the Mn-dose of 0.1 kgha-1and 0,3kgha-1.

  14. Thank you for your attention!

More Related