









































Pa
ge

 
1



Pa
ge

 
46

 American Journal of  
Food Science and Technology (AJFST)

Quality of  Fortified Zea Mays L (Maize) and Triticum Durum (Wheat) Flours
Abel Alberto Massingue Júnior1*, Bernabé Bernardo Massie1, Francisco José Luís Sigauque1, Anastância Amadeu Dimande1

Géssica Dalberty Fernandes1

Volume 2 Issue 2, Year 2023
ISSN: 2834-0086 (Online)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.54536/ajfst.v2i2.1997
https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajfst

Article Information ABSTRACT

Received: September 27, 2023

Accepted: October 30, 2023

Published: November 04, 2023

Maize flour is obtained through the milling process and contributes about 20% energy and 
15% protein. wheat flour is rich in starch (70 to75%), water (12 to 14%), protein (8 to16%), a 
small portion of  non-starch polysaccharides (2 to 3%), lipids (2%) and ash (1%). This study 
aimed to evaluate the centesimal quality of  maize and wheat flour. 8 samples of  flour were 
evaluated, being 2 ((First Choice and Mpupu) and 6 of  wheat flour (Faspão, Babita, Xiluva, 
Eagle, Pasta and Ntombi)). Moisture by loss on dissection at 105°C, ash by incineration, fat 
by goldfish method, protein by biuret method, fulling number by reading on mininfra grain 
analyzer Scan-T, gluten, wet and dry by glutomatic system, gluten index by centrifugation 
and fiber by enzymatic-gravimetric method were determined as quality parameters. The 
results showed fat content 0.61 to 1.59%, moisture 13.3 and 13.4%, fiber 0.22 to 0.38% and 
protein around 5.99 to 7.09% for the corn flours. Moisture ranging from 13.6 to 13.8%, 
protein from 10.30 to 11.22%, ash from 0.50 to 0.70%, water absorption from 58.23 to 
59.73%, falling number 276 to 354s, gluten around 24 to 29.1%, gluten index from 0 to 
95%, wet gluten from 28.46 to 29.80 and dry gluten ranging from 9.36 to 10.50%. No 
significant differences were observed among the wheat flour samples for moisture, protein, 
ash, water absorption and wet gluten. Significant differences were found for falling number 
(FN), gluten and dry gluten. There was sufficient evidence of  compliance with the flour 
quality criteria.

Keywords

Centesimal Composition, 
Farinography, Rheological 
Analysis, Wheat and Corn 
Flours

1 Department of  Food Processing Engineering, Higher Polytechnic Institute of  Gaza, Faculty of  Agriculture, Mozambique
* Corresponding author’s e-mail: abelmassingue7@gmail.com

INTRODUCTION
Maize (Zea Mays L.) is a cereal of  great importance 
worldwide, in countries of  Africa, Latin America and 
part of  Asia maize contributes about 20% of  energy and 
15% of  protein, in some cases maize constitutes the only 
source of  protein for some populations (Castro, 2008).  
The maize flour is obtained through the milling process, 
in which the grain is broken in order to remove the 
endosperm separating it from the bran and germ and 
reduce its size (Giacomelli et al., 2012). 
In order to be transformed into flour for human 
consumption, maize undergoes some transformations. 
Obtaining corn flour can be done in two ways, wet and 
dry. The process commonly used by Agroindustries in the 
transformation of  this cereal is dry milling, this due to 
the small need for machinery and the simplicity in the 
execution of  the process (Marcolin, 2018). In the wet 
milling process, the production of  several by-products is 
favored, with starch being the most important. (Marques, 
2016). 
The word wheat is derived from the term Triticum, which 
means broken, crushed in allusion to the process carried 
out for the separation of  the grain from its coating. The 
designation “wheat” is applied to the plant as well as its 
seed (Monho, 2013). White wheat flour is obtained by 
grinding the endosperm of  the cereal, preceded by the 
separation of  the germ and bran, thus obtaining more 
palatable products (Scheuer et al., 2011). 
The quality of  wheat grain and flour depends on 
the purpose of  the product, thus assuming different 

meanings, these characteristics can be divided into 
physical, chemical enzymatic and rheological. Among the 
physical-chemical tests can be found the hectoliter weight, 
protein, ash or fixed mineral residue and, the rheological 
tests, falling number, gluten content (dry and wet) and 
farinography (Módenes et al., 2009). 
According to Vedovati (2017), most of  the composition 
of  wheat flour is starch (70-75%), water (12-14%), protein 
(8-16%), a small portion of  non-starch polysaccharides 
(2-3%), lipids (2%) and ash (1%). These values are 
variable according to the wheat cultivar.  
The proteins present in wheat are directly related to 
the extensibility and elasticity of  the dough, a flour 
considered ideal for baking must present qualitative and 
quantitative fractions of  glutenins and gliadins, which 
directly influence the rheological properties of  gluten. 
The structural and functional properties of  starch, in turn, 
influence the texture, consistency, moisture, appearance 
and shelf  life of  foods (Costa, 2013).  
According to Lamke & Amorim (2013), the processing of  
food (wheat and corn) for the elaboration of  industrialized 
foods covers several stages, from the production and 
selection of  raw materials, to the storage and final 
distribution of  the products. Foods are processed into 
food products to make them more practical and attractive, 
in addition, the technologies employed by the industry 
allow the increase of  the shelf  life of  the food and the 
enrichment of  the products with vitamins and minerals.  
The quality control of  these same products ensures the 
elaboration of  products in accordance with the quality 



Pa
ge

 
47

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajfst

Am. J. Food. Sci. Technol. 2(2) 46-53, 2023

standards required and measured by the regulatory bodies 
(Paula & Nantes, 2017). The present research aimed to 
characterize the centesimal composition of  fortified 
maize and wheat flours.

MATERIALS AND METHODS 
Sample Collection  
2 maize flour samples ((First Choice and Mpupu) and 
6 wheat flour samples (Faspão, Babita, Xiluva, Eagle, 
Pasta and Ntombi)), packed in polypropylene bags, were 
randomly purchased from commercial markets in Beira 
city. The samples were coded according to the point of  
collection and were taken to the Laboratory of  Food 
Hygiene for analysis.

Determination of  Centesimal Composition and 
Rheology  
The moisture content, ash, fat, protein, fiber and water 
absorption (W.a) were evaluated for the centesimal 
composition and the rheological parameters were 
evaluated for gluten content, falling number, wet gluten, 
dry gluten and gluten index following the methods 
described by IAL (2008) & Lins (2021).

Moisture Content  
Moisture was determined by the gravimetric method. 
For this purpose, 5g of  flour was previously ground in 
a mortar, added in a Petri dish previously weighed on an 
analytical balance ADAM brand of  0.0001g precision, 
dissected in an oven of  the brand (ECOTHERM) with 
circulating air at 105ºC for 2 hours, then cooled to room 
temperature (±25º). Equation 1 was used for moisture 
determination. 
% moisture=  ((Pi-Pf))/Pi*100              (1)
Where: 
Pi- Initial weight of  the sample;  
Pf- Final weight of  the sample.

Determination of  Fat 
The fat content was determined by the Goldfish method. 
5g of  the sample was subjected to direct fat extraction 
with petroleum ether, extracting (55°C) for 4 hours in a 
Goldfish apparatus. Expression 2 was used to determine 
the fat percentage. 
% fat content= ((Capsule Weight+Fat)- Capsule 
Weight))/(Capsule Weight)*100              (2)

Ashes 
In an analytical balance of  ADAM brand with 0.0001g 
of  precision, 5g of  the sample was weighed in porcelain 
crucibles and placed in a muffle furnace brand (OPTIL 
IVYMEN) at a temperature of  550°C until verification 
of  incineration. The crucibles were then transferred to an 
oven at 105o C for 30 minutes with emphasis on lowering 
the temperature, followed by weighing them with the 
incinerated sample in inorganic matter.  The percentage 
of  ash was determined based on equation 3.
% ashes content=  ((m2-m))/((m1-m))*100                   (3)

Where: 
m - crucible weight; 
m1- weight of  crucible with wet sample;
m2 - weight of  crucible with ash.
Proteins 
Protein contents were determined by the biuret method, 
where 300 µL of  each extract (prepared in the proportion: 
10 g of  flour and 90 mL of  water) were mixed with 2000 
µL of  biuret reagent and left in a dark place for 30 minutes 
to give a purple color complex, and then the absorbance 
was read at 540 nm, in a spectrophotometer of  the 
Brand (YOKE) previously zeroed with distilled water. 
The protein content of  the samples was determined 
by extrapolation using a calibration curve consisting of  
casein in proportions from 0 to 10 mg/ml.

Fibers
Fiber was determined by the enzymatic-gravimetric 
method, where in triplicate 1g of  treated sample previously 
passed through 32 mesh sieve was weighed. The samples 
were mixed with 40 mL of  MES-TRIS buffer solution 
with pH 8.2 and 50 μg of  heat-resistant ɑ-amylase. The 
samples were then covered with aluminum foil and placed 
in a water bath at 95-100°C for 35 minutes with continuous 
stirring. Removed the beakers and cooled to (60±1) ºC, 
100 μL of  protease solution was added and again placed 
in a water bath. Subsequently, 5 mL of  0.561 hydrochloric 
acid was added to the samples under stirring. At constant 
temperature the pH was adjusted (4.0-4.7) by adding 1M 
sodium hydroxide solution. 300 μL of  amyloglucosidase 
solution was added, covered with aluminum foil and 
again placed in a water bath.  Subsequently, the content 
obtained from the enzymatic treatment was measured. 
The mixture was mixed with 95% alcohol at 60°C in a 4:1 
ratio, covered with aluminum foil and left to stand for one 
hour at room temperature. At the end of  the process, the 
previously weighed crucible was positioned in a kitassato 
coupled to a vacuum tube. 15mL of  78% alcohol was 
added and the alcoholic solution containing the alcoholic 
solution containing hydrolysis residue. The residue was 
washed with two portions of  15 mL of  95% alcohol and 
acetone, and the crucibles were dried in an oven at 100°C. 
The fiber was determined based on equation 4.
% of  fibers=  (RT-P-C-BT)/m*100                             (4)
Where: 
RT - total residue of  sample;
BT- total residue of  blank;
C - ash of  the sample;
M - mass of  the sample outlet;
P - protein content.

Falling Number Determination  
Through the humidity obtained in the reading in the 
Mininfra Grain Analyser Scan-T, it was determined the 
required amount of  sample for the analysis in the falling 
number table, with the weight found, it was weighed the 
amount found in the table according to the humidity of  
the flour in an analytical balance, subsequent addition 



Pa
ge

 
48

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajfst

Am. J. Food. Sci. Technol. 2(2) 46-53, 2023

of  4.5mL of  distilled water in a test tube. Then, with 
the aid of  funnel was introduced with subsequent 
homogenization for 30 seconds, then the sample already 
prepared was placed in the equipment (“Falling Number” 
FN 1000 -Perten Instruments. Stirring for 60 seconds at 
the end of  the test, the result of  the alpha amylase activity 
present in the flour was obtained.

Water Absorption (Wa) 
Water absorption was determined according to the 
method described by Wang et al. (2006). 5g of  sample 
was weighed into a 50 mL centrifuge tube and 30 mL of  
distilled water was added. The sample was shaken for 30 
s with a glass rod. The contents were left to stand for 10 
min and then the sample was centrifuged at 2300 rpm for 
25 min. The supernatant was decanted and drained. The 
tube was placed tilted downwards (angle of  15° to 20°) 
in an oven at 50°C with air circulation for 25 min. The 
tube was cooled in a desiccator and weighed. The water 
absorption was calculated in relation to 100g of  sample.
 
Determination of  Gluten
The gluten content analysis was performed in the 
Gluten Determinator System (Glutomatic, Centrifuge 
and Glutork). For this, 10g of  wheat flour was weighed 
in duplicate in mixed chambers and 4.7mL of  2% NaCl 
solution was added to the sample, where they were 
coupled to the Glutomatic and washing started. After 
washing, the samples were transferred to metal sieves 
and taken to the centrifuge, where a centrifugation was 
performed for 1 minute. After the centrifugation, the 
gluten that had passed through the sieve was scraped and 
weighed, followed by all the wet gluten resulting from 
the washing (retained and passing), which resulted in 
the wet gluten value. After weighing, the wet gluten was 
compressed and dried in the Glutork for 4 minutes. At 
the end of  drying, the sample was weighed, giving the dry 
gluten value. Expression 5 used to determine the gluten 
content. 
% of  gluten=  PGSx100/P                                            (5)
Where:  
PGS - Weight of  dry gluten; 
P - Weight of  the sample.

Determination of  the Gluten Index 
The gluten index was determined using the wet gluten, in 
the centrifugation process the harvester allowed a small 
amount to pass to the rear through the holes (which is 
weighed separately from the mass remaining on the front 
side of  the harvester. This was followed by the residue 

from the inner (A1) and outer (A2) parts. Equation 6 used 
for the determination of  the gluten index.
GI=A1/(A1+A2) x100%                (6)
Where: 
A1 - The mass present in the inner part of  the harvester; 
A2 - The mass present on the outside of  the harvester.
 
Wet and Dry Gluten 
For the determination of  wet gluten (percentage) is 
done by weighing the sample (10 g) of  flour with 5ml 
of  water, then a sieve is placed where the 10g of  flour 
and 5ml of  water are mixed, shakes by making a slightly 
circular motion the sieve to spread the flour and shakes 
to spread the water throughout the sample. Separation of  
insoluble proteins and starch from gluten-forming flour 
(gliadins and gluteins), using the Glutomatic device, the 
gluten samples are taken to a centrifuge with a rotational 
frequency capacity of  6000 in 5 minutes in order to 
reduce the moisture in the gluten and then the samples 
are weighed and to obtain the result, expression 7 was 
used.
GH=m1x100%                 (7) 
Where: 
GH - Wet gluten; 
m1 - Mass value of  wet gluten.

Statistical Analysis  
Analysis of  variance (ANOVA) was performed using 
the general linear model (GLM), through the statistical 
package Rstudio 4.2.1. In case of  significant effects, the 
difference of  the experimental units was evaluated by 
Tukey’s test at 5% level.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS  
Centesimal Composition of  Maize Flour
The results of  the physicochemical constitution of  corn 
flour are shown in table 1.
Table 1. Centesimal composition (100g) of  fortified 
maize flours.
The evaluated samples showed fat content ranging from 
0.61 to 1.59%. Higher (1.59%) lipid content was observed 
in sample A and lower (0.61%) for sample B, with 
significant differences (p <0.05) between them. These 
variations in fat content are possibly correlated with the 
composition and/or variety of  maize used and the type 
of  processing employed, since the samples underwent 
different treatments, with sample A being processed 
together with the germ.  
Higher results (0.61 and 1.59% fat) were reported by 
Giacomelli et al. (2012) in their study on the nutritional 

Table 1: Centesimal composition (100g) of  fortified maize flours
Samples Parameters

Fat (%) Moisture (%) Fiber (%) Protein (%)
A 1,59 13,3 0,38 7,09
B 0,61 13,4 0,22 5.99

Source: Authors



Pa
ge

 
49

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajfst

Am. J. Food. Sci. Technol. 2(2) 46-53, 2023

composition of  cornmeal, obtained contents ranging 
from 3.26 and 4.84% of  fat. Results close to those 
obtained in the present research were referenced by 
Teodoro (2018) in his study with aim of  determining 
the iron and centesimal composition of  wheat and corn 
flours, obtained fat content ranging from 1.6 to 1.8%. 
Araujo (2019) studying the centesimal composition, water 
absorption index and solubility index in flaked cornmeal 
marketed in Teresina, obtained fat content ranging from 
1.11 to 2.33%. 
Moisture of  13.3 and 13.4% was evident in the samples 
evaluated, without significant differences. This range of  values 
can be considered acceptable assuming that the moisture 
levels established by the National Health Surveillance Agency, 
ANVISA (2017), range from 13 to 15%.  
Results close to those found in the present research were 
reported by Giacomelli et al. (2012) (11.05 to 12.57% 
moisture), when performing the nutritional composition 
of  precooked, stone-ground maize flour and the culinary 
preparation “polenta”. The moisture content of  maize 
flour should not exceed 14% (Delagustin, 2012). 
Studying moisture determination in corn flours using 
thermogravimetry and the classical method of  analysis 

made by Fernandes & Araújo (2007), when analyzing the 
moisture content, they obtained results ranging from 10.2 
to 12.2%. According to ANVISA through RDC N°711, 
of  July 1, 2022, the flours must have a maximum of  14%. 
The results evidenced fiber content ranging from 0.22 
to 0.38%. Higher (0.38%) fiber was observed in sample 
A. High values (0.22 and 0.38% fiber) were reported by 
Giacomelli et al., (2012) around 2.63 to 3.88% fiber, when 
developing their research on nutritional composition 
of  corn flours. The protein content ranged from 5.99 
to 7.09%. This range can be considered acceptable 
assuming that, Mutla et al. (2018), the protein content of  
maize depends on the variety, growing conditions and 
environmental factors of  cultivation. Values divergent 
to those obtained in the present study were reported by 
Somavat et al. (2016), around 10.31%, 11.16% and 8.4% 
of  protein content respectively, for purple, blue and 
yellow maize.

Centesimal and Rheological Composition of  Wheat 
Flours 
Table 2 represents the proximate, rheological and 
farinographic composition of  wheat flour.

Table 2: Centesimal (100g), farinographic and rheological characterization of  wheat flours
Parameters Samples  

A B C D E F
Moisture (%) 13.7±0.15ª 13.8±0.25ª 13.6±0.15ª 13.6±0.40ª 13.6±0.10ª 13.6±0.17ª
Protein (%) 10.90±0.28ª 11.22±0.51ª 10.30±0.01ª 10.35±0.11ª 11.02±0.67ª 10.36±0.11ª
Ash (%) 0.70±0.02ª 0.65±0.05ª 0.50±0.03b 0.70±0.01ª 0.65±0.02ª 0.69±0.05ª
W.a (%) 58.23±0.24ª 59.73±0.55ª 59.20±1.30ª 58.23±0.49ª 58.58±0.35ª 58.16±0.28ª
FN (%) 269±1.46b 325.67±0.62a 331.67±0.10a 324.0±0.11a 350.0±0.17a 334±0.14a

Gluten (%/s) 29.1±0.83a 27.6±2.08abc 28.5±0.61ab 25.7±0.58bcd 24.0±0.76d 25.5±0.30cd

GI (%) 0 0 0 0 95 0
GH (%) 29.80±0.91a 29.31±0.78a 28.78±0.20a 28.46±1.45a 29.13±0.68a 29.08±1.18a

GS (%) 10.50±0.30a 9.86±0.45ab 9.36±0.47ab 9.73±0.25ab 9.43±0.20b 9.75±0.13b

Means ± standard deviation followed by the same letter in the same row do not present significant differences at 5% Tukey level. W.a = 
Water Absorpt; FN = Falling Number; GH = Wet Gluten; GI = Gluten Index; GS = Dry Gluten.
Source: Authors

Moisture 
The samples showed moisture ranging from 13.6 to 
13.8%, where higher values were observed in formulations 
B (13.8) and A (13.7), without significant differences 
between them. These results are acceptable considering 
the criteria established by Normative Instruction No. 08, 
of  June 2, 2005, of  the Ministry of  Agriculture, Livestock 
and Supply, Brazil (2005). 
Similar values (13%) were reported by Resosemito et al. 
(2022) when studying on obtaining and physicochemical 
evaluation of  deglutenized special wheat flour, obtained 
moisture around 13.0%, Lins (2021) (13.3 to 13.9% 
moisture), studying the influence of  the semolina 
purification step on the physicochemical and rheological 
characteristics of  wheat flours, by Oro (2013) in his study 

on the adaptation of  methods for the evaluation of  the 
technological quality of  whole wheat flour, obtained 
13.6 to 13.9% moisture content, and by Costa (2013) 
in the range of  13.8% moisture content, when studying 
about the evaluation of  the industrial quality of  wheat 
strains by means of  physical-chemical, rheological and 
baking methods. Lower results were reported by Macedo 
(2017) when developing his research on physicochemical 
characterization of  wheat flours used in bakeries in the 
municipality of  Paraiso Tocantis, obtained moisture 
contents around 11.73 to 12.74%, and by Rosa-Campos et 
al. (2014) in their study entitled physicochemical analysis 
of  sixteen brands of  enriched type 1 wheat flours, 
marketed in the federal district, obtained moisture around 
10.88 to 11.77%.



Pa
ge

 
50

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajfst

Am. J. Food. Sci. Technol. 2(2) 46-53, 2023

Protein
The protein content showed results ranging from 10.30 
to 11.22%. Higher protein content was observed in 
samples B (11.22%) and E (11.02). On the other hand, 
samples C, D, F and A showed protein contents around 
10.30, 10.35, 10.36 and 10.90%, respectively. Statistically, 
all samples did not show significant differences (p >0.05) 
among themselves. 
In his study on determination of  the technological value 
and utilization of  various types of  blends of  soft wheat 
flour and durum wheat semolina for the manufacture of  
traditional bread Monho (2013), obtained protein contents 
ranging from 9 to 12%. Rosa-Campos et al. (2014) in their 
study entitled physicochemical analysis of  sixteen brands 
of  enriched type 1 wheat flours, marketed in the Federal 
District, obtained 10.49 to 11.07% protein, results in 
agreement with those obtained in this study. Superior 
results were described by Singer (2006), physicochemical, 
rheological, enthalpy and baking properties of  flour 
obtained from irrigated wheat, obtained protein ranging 
from 10.49 to 10.60%.

Ashes 
The results obtained in the determination of  the fixed 
mineral residue content ranged from 0.50 to 0.70%. 
These results can be considered acceptable assuming 
that, Cezar (2012), the maximum ash content should be 
0.8%. Higher values were verified in samples A and D 
(0.70%), F (0.69%) and B and E (0.65) without significant 
differences (p >0.05) between them, unlike sample C. 
In the evaluation carried out by Lins (2021) studying 
the influence of  the semolina purification step on the 
physicochemical and rheological characteristics of  wheat 
flours, they obtained ash content ranging from 0.48 to 
0.77%, by Macedo (2017) around 0.60%, and by Rosa-
Campos et al. (2014) with 0.49 to 0.55% of  fixed mineral 
residue, and also by Lanzarini (2015) obtained ash content 
around 0.48 to 0.78%, when performing quality control 
applied to bread wheat flour produced in mills in the state 
of  Paraná , results close to those obtained in the present 
research. 
Allied results were described by Silva et al. (2015) analyzing 
different brands of  wheat flour, obtained ash content 
around 0.50%, and by Paixão (2022) when studying the 
quality control applied in wheat flours produced in the 
State of  Maranhão: emphasis on physicochemical and 
rheological analyzes, obtained 0.70% of  fixed mineral 
residue.  
Zimmermann (2009) when analyzing wheat flours found 
ash values between 1.4 and 2.5% for two of  the flours 
analyzed, being considered whole flour, different from 
what occurred in this work in which all flours remained 
in the type 1 range, Oro (2013) in his study on adaptation 
of  methods for evaluating the technological quality of  
whole wheat flour, having obtained ash content around 
1. 61%, Guarienti & Caiera (2022), studying special flour 
and obtained from clean and germinated cereal, found 
ash content between 0.66% and 1.61%.61%, Guarienti & 

Caierao (2022), studying on the special flour and obtained 
from the cleaned and degerminated cereal, found ash 
content between 0.66% and 1.35%, results above those 
obtained in the present research. These low ash contents 
may be associated with the composition of  the raw 
material used, on the other hand, Silva et al. (2015) point 
out that low ash values indicate better quality, since the 
higher the ash content, the greater the presence of  bran 
in it, interfering with the quality of  bakery products.

Water Absorption (W.A) 
Water absorption values ranged from 58.23 to 59.73%. 
Statistically, there were no significant differences (p>0.05) 
between the formulations. 
Results allied to those obtained in the present research 
were revealed by Oro (2013) in his study on adaptation 
of  methods for evaluation of  technological quality of  
whole wheat flour, obtained 58.5% of  water absorption, 
Martins et al. (2012) when developing their study on 
water absorption in a mixture of  wheat sticks of  different 
commercial brands, obtained values for water absorption 
ranging between 54.07 and 67.66%, and by Silva (2017) in 
his research on rheological and physicochemical analyzes 
of  wheat flour from six different cultivars recommended 
for the state of  Paraná, obtained 58% of  water absorption.  
Costa et al. (2008) seeking to differentiate the technological 
parameters of  flour from national and imported wheat 
grains, obtained water absorption values in the range 
of  54.43 and 59.3% for imported flours and 53.3 and 
57.6% for national flours, Paixão (2022) controlling the 
quality applied in wheat flours produced in the State of  
Maranhão: emphasis on physicochemical and rheological 
analyzes, obtained 57 to 58.7% of  water absorption, 
going in accordance with the results obtained in this study.  
Junqueira et al. (2007), flours with high technological 
quality for bread production are those that present water 
absorption between 60 and 64%, by Costa (2013) in the 
study of  Evaluation of  the industrial quality of  wheat 
strains through physical-chemical, rheological and baking 
methods having obtained values ranging from 59.4 to 
77.0% of  water absorption, results higher than those 
obtained in the present research. This significance can be 
justified given that, Fernandes et al. (2008), for wholemeal 
flours high values of  water absorption are expected due 
to their high fiber content in relation to refined flour. 
Similarly, Noort et al. (2010) explained that the presence 
of  wholemeal flours does not cause a significant increase 
in water absorption in farinography.

Falling Number (FN) 
The results obtained on the drop number ranged from 
276 to 354 seconds. Samples B, C, D, E F showed higher 
percentage of  drop number. Lower (269s) was observed 
in sample A, being different from the others. These 
differentiations regarding the FN are possibly correlated 
with the quality of  wheat and treatment in processing. 
Results consistent with those obtained in this study were 
described by Lins (2021) in his research on the influence 



Pa
ge

 
51

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajfst

Am. J. Food. Sci. Technol. 2(2) 46-53, 2023

of  the semolina purification step on the physicochemical 
and rheological characteristics of  wheat flours, obtained 
values of  falling number around 350 seconds, Cezar 
(2012) obtained a falling number around 200 to 350 
seconds, when developing his study on quality control in 
wheat flour, Lazarini et al. (2020) analyzed ten samples 
of  type 1 wheat flour finding results for FN in the range 
351.33 to 390 seconds, and by Silva (2017) in his study on 
rheological and physicochemical analysis of  wheat flour 
from different cultivars in the Paraná state, obtained a 
drop number of  350 seconds.   Higher results than those 
obtained in the present research were reported by Singer 
(2006) when evaluating the physicochemical, rheological, 
enthalpy and baking properties of  flour obtained from 
irrigated wheat, obtained falling number around 409 to 
477 seconds.

Gluten Content 
The gluten content showed results ranging from 24 to 
29.1%. Higher gluten content was observed in samples 
A (29.1%), C (28.5%) and B (27.6%), with significant 
differences (p <0.05) between them. These results 
possibly, given Silva et al. (2015), are directly related to 
water absorption, especially for bakery doughs that have 
a high elasticity. 
Results consistent with those obtained in this study were 
described by Lins (2021) in his research on the influence 
of  the semolina purification step on the physicochemical 
and rheological characteristics of  wheat flours, obtained 
gluten content from 24 to 29%.  
Results lower than those obtained in the present research 
were reported by Silva et al. (2015) around 16.01 and 
23.51% gluten, when studying different brands of  wheat 
flours, Dias et al. (2015) (8.0% gluten) when performing 
physicochemical analysis of  traditional wheat flour, 
Zimermann et al. (2009) studying physicochemical and 
rheological evaluation of  the main wheat flours marketed 
in bakeries in the municipality of  Cascavel, obtained 
gluten content ranging from 9.25 and 10,55%.

Gluten Index  
Gluten index results ranged from 0 to 95%. In the 
evaluation made by Costa (2013), he found the gluten 
index in the range of  98.22%, close to the results obtained 
in this research. Allied results (95% gluten index) were 
referenced by Paixão (2018), ranging from 95.60 to 
97.29%. Cauvain & Young (2009) reinforce that when 
the gluten formed is considered very strong and not very 
extensible, the resulting bread will be dense and without 
volume; however, if  the gluten network is considered 
weak, it breaks at the time of  fermentation, generating 
breads with holes.

Wet Gluten (GH) 
No significant differences (p >0.05) were found between 
the samples. In the evaluation made by Oro (2013) in his 
study on the adaptation of  methods for the evaluation 
of  the technological quality of  whole wheat flour, he 
obtained wet gluten content around 16.98 to 25.75%, and 

by Dias et al. (2015) when studying about physicochemical 
analysis of  traditional wheat flour, obtained 24% of  wet 
gluten content, results lower than those obtained in the 
present research. 
Similar results were found by Costa (2018), in which 
it was observed a variation of  24.83 to 28.72% for wet 
gluten, when evaluating the content of  wet gluten and 
dry gluten of  wheat flours of  wheat flours marketed 
in conquista Vitoria - BA, Silva (2017) in his study on 
rheological and physicochemical analysis of  wheat flour 
from different cultivars in the Paraná state, in the range 
of  28.02% of  wet gluten, by Costa (2013) in the study of  
on evaluation of  the industrial quality of  wheat strains 
by means of  physical-chemical, rheological and baking 
methods, having obtained a variation of  28.9%.

Dry Gluten (GS) 
The averages ranged from 9.36 to 10.50%. Sample A 
(10.50%) had the highest mean, followed by formulation 
B with a mean of  around 9.86. Significant differences (p 
<0.05) were found between samples B, C, D, E and F 
compared to sample A.  
In the evaluation made by Oro (2013) in his study on 
adaptation of  methods for evaluation of  technological 
quality of  whole wheat flour, revealed dry gluten content 
around 9.9%. Paixão (2018) reported dry gluten around 
9.76 to 9.86%, Dias et al. (2015) when studying about 
physicochemical analysis of  traditional wheat flour, 
reported a range of  9.65% of  dry gluten contents, Costa 
(2013), approached dry gluten contents around 9.6%.6%. 
According to Ribeiro (2009), the ideal range for dry 
gluten content is between 7.5 and 14%, Silva (2017), 
obtained results ranging from 7 to 10% depending on 
their applications, results similar to those obtained in the 
present study.

CONCLUSION
No significant differences were observed between the 
wheat flour samples for moisture, protein, ash, water 
absorption, and wet gluten. Significant differences were 
found for falling number (FN), gluten and dry gluten. 
There was sufficient evidence of  compliance with the 
flour quality criteria.
 
Acknowledgments
We express with love and affection, our gratitude 
to all those who directly or indirectly provided their 
preponderant help, whether moral or material, for the 
development of  this research

REFERENCES
Araujo, M. (2019). Centesimal composition, water 

absorption index and solubility index in flaked corn 
flours marketed in Teresina. Teresina: Eate vi. 

Brazil. (2005). Normative Instruction No. 8, June 3, 
2005. Technical Regulation of  Identity and Quality 
of  Wheat Flour. Official Gazette of  the Federative 
Republic of  Brazil, Brasília, DF, June 3, 5, 91. 

Castro, M. V. L. (2008). Industrial yield and nutritional 



Pa
ge

 
52

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajfst

Am. J. Food. Sci. Technol. 2(2) 46-53, 2023

value of  QPM corn grains and common corn grains 
and germ. Goiânia. 

Cauvain & Young, S. P. (2009). Baking Technology (2nd ed.), 
Manole Publishing. 

Costa, M. S. (2013). Evaluation of  the industrial quality 
of  wheat strains through physicochemical, rheological 
and bread making methods. São José do Rio Preto.

Costa, R. (2018). Evaluation of  the content of  wet gluten 
and dry gluten of  wheat flours dry of  wheat flours 
marketed in vitória da conquista - BA. In: Proceedings 
of  the 4th Week of  Food Engineering and I Symposium of  
Postgraduate Studies in Food Engineering and Science of  
UESB. Anais. Itapetinga (BA) UESB.

Delagustin (2012). Nutritional Composition of  Pre-
cooked, Stone Ground and Cooked Corn Flours. 

Dias, C. M., Freitas, M. C. J., & Cerqueira, P. M. (2014). 
Physicochemical analysis of  traditional wheat flour. 

Dias, C. M., Freitas, M. C. J., & Cerqueira, P. M. (2015). 
Physicochemical analysis of  traditional wheat flour. 
Nutrition Brazil, 4, 16-19. 

Fernandes, A. F., Pereira, J., Germani, R., & Oiano-Neto, 
J. (2008). Effect of  partial replacement of  wheat flour 
by potato peel flour (Solanum Tuberosum Lineu). 
Food Science and Technology, 28, 56-65. 

Fernandes, N., & Araujo, E. (2007). Determination of  
moisture in corn flour using thermogravimetry and 
the classical method of  analysis. Rio Grande. Natal.

Giacomelli, D. (2012). Nutritional composition of  pre-
cooked, stone-ground maize flours and the culinary 
preparation “polenta”. Alim Nutr. 415-420. 

Guarienti & Caierao. (2022). Standards for the commercial 
classification of  wheat flour in Brazil. 

Ial - Adolfo Lutz Institute (2008). Physical-chemical methods 
for food analysis. (4ª ed.) São Paulo. p.70 - 98. 

Junqueira, R. M., Rocha, F., Moreira, M. A., & Castro, 
I. A. (2007). Effect of  proofing time and wheat 
flour strength on bleaching, sensory characteristics, 
and volume of  french breads with added soybean 
lipoxygenase. Cereal Chemistry, 84, 443-449. 

Lanzarini, P. D. (2015). Quality control applied to bread 
wheat flour produced in mills in the state of  Paraná. 
Paraná. 4, 129-140. 

Lemke, S., & Amorim, M. L. (2013). Food production and 
industrialization. (4th ed.) Cuiabá: Rede e Tec Brasil. p. 
60.

Lins, E. G. C. (2021). Influence of  the semolina 
purification step on the physicochemical and 
rheological characteristics of  wheat flours. Fortaleza. 
1-39.

Macedo, I. S., Soares, L. S., Souza, F. G., & Rodrigues, F. 
M. (2017). Physicochemical characterization of  wheat 
flours used in bakeries in the municipality of  Paraíso 
do Tocantins-To. 

Marcolin, L. C. (2018). Process mapping and verification 
of  hygienic-sanitary failures of  a cereal agroindustry. 
Rio Grande. 

Marques, R. C. D. (2016). Physicochemical, microbiological 
and technological study of  corn industrialization 

residues and food utilization from the elaboration of  
pasta. Goiânia.

Módenes, N. A., Silva, M. A., & Trigueros, D. E. G. 
(2009). Evaluation of  the rheological properties of  
stored wheat. Food Science and Technology, 29, 508-512. 

Monho, A. T. (2013). Determination of  the technological 
and utilization value of  various types of  blends of  
soft wheat flour and durum wheat semolina for the 
manufacture of  traditional bread. Lisbon. 

Mutlu, C., Arslan-Tontul, S., Candal, C., Kilic, O., & 
Erbas, M. (2018). Physicochemical, Thermal, and 
Sensory Properties of  Blue Corn (Zea Mays L.). Food 
Chemistry, 83, 53-59. 

Noort, M. W. J., Haaster, D., Hemery, Y., Schols, H. A., & 
Hamer, R. J. (2010). The effect of  particle size of  wheat 
bran fractions on bread quality - Evidence for fiber - 
protein interactions. Journal of  Cereal Science, 52, 59-64. 

Oro, T. (2013). Adaptation of  methods for technological 
quality assessment of  whole wheat flour. Florianópolis, 
SC. 

Paixão, B. L. A. (2022). Quality control applied to wheat 
flours produced in the State of  Maranhão: emphasis 
on physicochemical and rheological analyzes. São Luís. 

Paula, L. N., Alves, A. R., & Nantes, E. A. S. (2017). 
The importance of  quality control in food industry. 
Conhecimento Online, 9, 78-91. 

Resosemito, F. S., Carvalho, J. G., Araújo. R. R., Souza, 
A. E. C., Ferreira, D. S., & Gonçalves, M. S (2022). 
Obtaining and physicochemical evaluation of  
deglutenized special wheat flour. Latin American 
Journal of  Development. Curitiba, 4, 1533-1540. 

Ribeiro, M. N. (2009). Influence of  wheat conditioning 
time on the technological quality of  flour. Center for 
Agricultural Sciences, Federal University of  Ceará. 

Rosa-Campos, A. A., Rocha, J. E. S., & Borgo, L. A. 
(2014). Physicochemical analysis of  sixteen brands of  
enriched type 1 wheat flours marketed in the Federal 
District. Food Hygiene. 190-194. 

Scheuer, P. M., Francisco, A., Miranda, M. Z., & Limberger, 
V. M. (2011). Wheat: characteristics and use in baking. 
Revista Brasileira de Produtos Agroindustriais, 2, 211-222. 

Silva, A. F. V., Laurintino, T. K. S., Carvalho, L. D. B., 
Lima, R. D., & Ribeiro, D. S. (2015).  Analysis of  
different brands of  wheat flour: Acid content, 
color and ash: analysis of  different brands of  wheat 
flour: acid content, color and ash. Brazilian Journal of  
Agrotechnology, 5, 18-22. 

Silva, K. A. (2017). Rheological and physicochemical 
analysis of  wheat flour from different cultivars in 
the Paraná state. Federal Technology University of  
Paraná. Ponta Grossa.

Singer, C. S. (2006). Physicochemical, rheological, 
enthalpy and baking properties of  flour obtained 
from irrigated wheat. São Paulo. 

Somavat, P., Li, Q., Mejia, E. G., Liu, W., & Singh, V. 
(2016). Coproduct yield comparisons of  purple, blue 
and yellow dent corn for various milling processes. 
Industrial Crops and Products, 87, 266-72. 



Pa
ge

 
53

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajfst

Am. J. Food. Sci. Technol. 2(2) 46-53, 2023

Teodoro, J. T. T. (2018). Determination of  iron and 
centesimal composition of  wheat and corn flours. 
Medianeira.

Vedovati, FS (2017). Rheological behavior of  wheat 
flour with partial substitution of  green banana flour. 
Londrina. 38.

Zimmermann, L. O. G., Sedor, J., Noreto, L. M., Santiago, 

W. E, & Ferreira, D. T. L. (2009). Physicochemical 
and rheological evaluation of  the main wheat flours 
marketed in bakeries in the municipality of  Cascavel. 
Proceedings of  the I International Seminar on Science. 
Technology and Environment. UNIOESTE, Cascavel – 
Paraná.


