Gluten strength improving, but customers remain concerned

[gustgd]

http://www.manitobacooperator.ca/crops/gluten-strength-improving-but-customers-remain-concerned/?utm_source=FBC Publications&utm_campaign=afd6abaa33-Manitoba Co-operator daily enews Mar 13%2C 2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_2da8244677-afd6abaa33-88119461


"Did Western Canada ever produce consistent-quality wheat, or was it a market-promotion-fuelled myth?

“We were probably a little better at it at one time,” Entz said in an interview.

But things changed. Years ago one wheat — AC Barrie — accounted for nearly half of the West’s production.

“So that in itself made for consistency right off the hop,” he said.

[wmoebis]

Also wonder if it could have anything to do with the changes to HVK as grading factor?

What about the changes to KVD and farmers now having to sign declarations. Are elevator staff being trained enough to spot WOOC's?

Maybe just maybe the CGC and CIGI have made some mistakes. They are only human.

[farmaholic]

What change is that regarding HVK wmoebis?
Thanks in advance.

[may-be]

Some information I learned at a seminar about gluten strength at AG days in Brandon.
To little gluten strength and it gums up their mixers, which would be no fun when your doing a 30 tonne batch.
To much and the mixers work harder and longer to get the desired product.

Gluten strength is higher and lower in different areas across the country but was more blended before. Now we have 2 100-130 cars come in from two nearby terminals and fill a boat with an off grade product.
Some varieties are grown less and they are working on a way of detecting the strength earlier.

I personally do not believe the CWB would have made much impact on the railways handling of our product.

[wmoebis]

I believe it was 2007 HVK was removed as a grading factor in #2 cwrs.

Prior to 2007 we were down graded for HVK for wheat that had less than 65% in a #1 and 35% in a #2 cwrs. China for example, mostly bought #2 milling wheat they didn't want the HVK factor removed. But we removed anyway. Is there really a baking issue or is it our customers wanting something we aren't supplying. I believe the CWB warned of this and were against the removal.

That being said, I was in favor of the removal back then too. I was even questioning why HVK was a degrading factor and why it hadn't been removed years earlier. I felt farmers were being asked to supply too high of quality, but if we are going to lose customers or price, because of our quality/aesthetics it may not have been worth it.

[farmaholic]

"Aesthetics" is the key word. If it had decent protien, and falling number does it really matter how good the HVK is. To me it is only a quick "visual" indicator, test it.

[Steve_Winkler]

Bingo Farmaholic. Well said.

Looking for more and different avenues to market our CWRS around here these days. Our particular terminal has actually been quite accurate IMO of late, but I sure hate relying on a subjective eyeball on so many grade factors.

Sure be nice to have another 10 - 20 frost free days in our neck of the woods, I would happily try growing something else.

Regards,

Steve

[wmoebis]

Have to look at from buyers point of view too tho! I don't mean your local buyer but say the buyer/broker in China. If they are looking for a way to buy for less $.

Let say we are looking to buy a new car. A dealer has 2 brand new cars, identical both have every option we want, same color, same power train everything the same. But one has been keyed, scratch from front to rear on one side. Works just as good in all respects but just doesn't look as nice as the other or what we are used to, or what we want.

Which one are we going to buy. We may buy keyed one, but not for same money and if the dealer demands the same for either, we may just tell him were to go and go somewhere else to buy.

HVK is not a subjective grading factor it is an objective grading factor, the only subjective part of it is if the grader is properly trained by qualified instructor to assess the kernel to tell whether it is hard vitreous or not.

HVK picks are a tedious job and a lot of elevators get the "new guy" to do the pick. It's not easy like an ergot pick, it takes practice and training to learn the difference and to assess properly.

Refer you to this topic back in 2006:

melvill Reply posted May 31, 2006 19:40
wmoebis, your question got my curiosity going so I did some digging. According to a book from the Cdn. Gr. Commission library, "Wheat Grading in Western Canada: 1883-1983", hard vitreous kernels were first defined in the 1925 revision of the Canada Grain Act. The book said, "An ambiguity in the wording of the previous grade definitions was also cleared up by separating the concepts of variety and percentage of hard vitreous kernels. Previously the definition for No. 1 Manitoba Hard wheat was worded: " ... and shall be composed of at least 75% of Red Fife wheat." The new definition said: "... shall include all varieties of hard red spring wheat equal in value to Marquis wheat," and further "... shall contain 75% of hard vitreous kernels."

Going on the book said, "By this time, hard vitreous kernel percentage in hard spring and hard winter wheats was widely considered to be closely related
to protein content. The United States, in defining their first federal grain standards in 1916, had set up a classification for hard spring and hard winter wheats based on percentages of hard vitreous kernels, each classification then having a series of grades. This focused the attention of wheat buyers on hard vitreous percentage classification and grading, and Canada responded by spelling
out more clearly what had been implied by the grade definitions for many years."

So basically the HVK spec in grading was there to allow visual evaluation of the milling and baking quality of hard red spring and hard red winter wheat.

Incidently, the U.S. grading system requires a minimum of about 75% HVK for Dark Northern Spring, a minimum of about 40% for Northern Spring and anything less than that is graded Spring.

I talked to the CWB sales department about this issue. Japan, for instance, always buys #1 CWRS which must have a minimum of 65% HVK but millers there are used to 80% to 90% HVK. Persuading them to take a lower HVK level may be a tough sell.

Last year China bought 1.5 Mil t of #2 13.5% which requires a minimum of 35% HVK. The first cargos of that sale were #2 13.5% but with about 60% HVK. The last cargo of that sale was #2 13.5% but just above 35% HVK. The Chinese millers that received grain from the last cargo complained about it saying it looked like domestic Chinese wheat even though it met all the specs for #2.

This whole issue started because grading by HVK is a very subjective process. The CGC has begun a process to remove subjectivity (eye-balling) from the grade specs, hoping to replace it with objective (or machine) measurements of grade.

Sorry this is so long but it's an important question.

I agree the process is subjective not the factor.

[Braveheart]

There is the theory in some circles that fungicide use has contributed to lower gluten strength. The wheat plant is under less stress and this causes the gluten to be weaker.

It could be that a lot of Harvest variety was grown. Harvest has lower gluten strength.

Leaves me wondering if gluten strength could become a spec that some buyers will pay more for, and or IP within a chain?

[tweety]

It was only the CWB that wanted HVK for its 'customers' demanded it. Since we have accurate protein measurements HVK is a non issue (which used to be a determiner of protein) save price bargaining.

But the science is quite clear.

Hard vitreous kernel (HVK) content is a widely used specification in the grading and marketing of hard wheats. The CGC defines hard vitreous kernels as those having 'a natural translucent coloring which is an externally visible sign of hardness'. Kernels having a starch spot of any size are considered to be non-vitreous (also known as starchy, yellow berry or mealy kernels).

Several factors influence the degree to which wheat becomes non-vitreous, including weather conditions, soil fertility and heredity (Phillips and Niernberger 1996). It is generally accepted that the primary effect of HVK on wheat quality is a direct relationship between vitreousness and protein content (Pomeranz et al. 1976, Simmonds 1974). Pomeranz et al. (1976) showed that protein quality is not affected because HVK and loaf volume are unrelated when protein content is held constant.

A secondary effect of HVK is a positive correlation to kernel hardness (Pomeranz et al. 1976) The softer nature of nonvitreous wheat is due to a less extensive gluten protein matrix which results in weaker protein-starch adhesion within the endosperm (Simmonds 1974). Phillips and Nierberger concluded that degree of vitreousness has no effect on milling yield. Work done in our laboratory confirmed that for hand-picked samples exhibiting variable degree of vitreousness there is an effect on kernel hardness as evident by a change in particle size index (based on the concept of break release) measured as described by Williams and Sobering (1986) (Table 5). The effect is so slight that intrinsic hardness differences among wheat classes are readily discernible for piebald (partly vitreous) kernels. There is some overlap in hardness between classes when kernels are fully starchy, but for North American hard wheat fully starchy kernels rarely comprise a major proportion of commercial wheat samples.

Protein content of wheat can be easily, precisely and objectively measured. In contrast, HVK determination is tedious and subjective. Increasingly protein guarantees are a prerequisite for marketing wheat which may make HVK a redundant quality factor.

http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/research-recherche/dexter/gfqw-cfab/gfqw-cfab-4-eng.htm

[Jvan]

I heard they plan to deregiater Harvest, it would become a Gp wheat

[TOM4CWB]

I had heard the CWB was the primary push behind lower gluten strength to differentiate between US and CDN HRS.

Lower gluten strength... allows faster mixing times and shorter total time for baking a loaf/bakery products.

Hmmm... very hard to compete with the big dog in the back yard (USDNS)... with a little hunter that isn't doing the job well! Perhaps the lower values we are receiving are an indication of quality... as well as service???

I am going to check into the new CPS REDS and see how they measure up!

If folks haul south... the CDN CWRS is blended at the mills State side with DNS... so they get the grist content for the flour spec needed. So generally no large discount because blending CDN WHT is used.