Advertisement

Cereal Research Communications

, Volume 41, Issue 3, pp 493–499 | Cite as

Influence of Hammer Mill Screen Size on Processing Parameters and Starch Enrichment in Milled Sorghum

  • G. J. Al-RabadiEmail author
Quality and Utilization

Abstract

The effect of hammer mill screen size on processing parameters and particle size of milled sorghum were examined. Sorghum grains were ground through two levels of hammer mill screen size: 2 mm and 6 mm and then subsequently fractionated by size on a set of eight sieves ranging from 0.045 mm to 2.8 mm. The objective of this experiment were: i) to characterize the influence of hammer mill screen size (2 and 6 mm) on processing parameters: production output, energy consumption, average particle size (dgw), geometric standard deviation (sgw); ii) to characterize the influence of particle size, after segregation by sieving, on starch enrichment. The results of this study showed that using 6 mm hammer milling screen size has resulted in a significant effect on production output, energy consumption, dgw with no effect on sgw. Different particle sizes, when segregated by sieving, have shown significant effect on starch content. Particle size retained by sieve size 1.7 mm had the highest starch content, whereas particles retained by sieve size 0.125 mm had the lowest, which suggest potential applications in ruminant and monogastric nutrition.

Keywords

sorghum particle size mill processing parameters 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Al-Rabadi, G.J.S., Gilbert, R.G., Gidley, M.J. 2009. Effect of particle size on kinetics of starch digestion in milled barley and sorghum grains by porcine alpha-amylase. J. Cereal Sci. 50:198–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Al-Rabadi, G.J., Torley, P.J., Williams, B.A., Bryden, W.L., Gidley, M.J. 2011a. Effect of extrusion temperature and pre-extrusion particle size on starch digestion kinetics in barley and sorghum grain extrudates. Animal Feed Sci. and Technol. 168:267–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Al-Rabadi, G.J., Torley, P.J., Williams, B.A., Bryden, W.L., Gidley, M.J. 2011b. Particle size of milled barley and sorghum and physico-chemical properties of grain following extrusion. J. Food Engineering 103:464–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Al-Rabadi, G.J., Torley, P.J., Williams, B.A., Bryden, W.L., Gidley, M.J. 2012. Particle size heterogeneity in milled barley and sorghum grains: Effects on physico-chemical properties and starch digestibility. J. Cereal Sci. 56:396–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Amerah, A.M., Ravindran, V., Lentle, R.G., Thomas, D.G. 2007. Feed particle size implications on the digestion and performance of poultry. World Poultry Sci. J. 63:439–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. ASAE 2003. Method of Determining and Expressing Fineness of Feed Materials by Sieving. Standard no. S319.3. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, 602–605.Google Scholar
  7. Blasel, H.M., Hoffman, P.C., Shaver, R.D. 2006. Degree of starch access: An enzymatic method to determine starch degradation potential of corn grain and corn silage. Animal Feed Sci. and Technol. 128:96–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Deaton, J.W., Lott, B.D., Simmons, J.D. 1989. Hammer mill versus roller mill grinding of corn for commercial egg layers. Poultry Sci. 68:1342–1344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gunawardena, C.K., Zijlstra, R.T., Beltranena, E. 2010. Characterization of the nutritional value of air-classified protein and starch fractions of field pea and zerotannin faba bean in grower pigs. J. Animal Sci. 88:660–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Huntington, G.B., Harmon, D.L., Richards, C.J. 2006. Sites, rates, and limits of starch digestion and glucose metabolism in growing cattle. J. Animal Sci. 84:E14–E24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Martin, S.A. 1984. Comparison of hammer mill and roller mill grinding and the effect of particle size reduction on mixing and pelleting. M.S. Thesis. Kansas State Univ., Manhattan, USA.Google Scholar
  12. Onwulata, C.I., Konstance, R.P. 2006. Extruded corn meal and whey protein concentrate: Effect of particle size. J. of Food Processing and Preservation 30:475–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Owens, F.N., Zinn, R.A., Kim, Y.K. 1986. Limits to starch digestion in the ruminant small intestine. J. Animal Sci. 63:1634–1648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Owsley, W.F., Knabe, D.A., Tanksle, T.D. 1994. Effect of sorghum particle size on digestibility of nutrients at the terminal ileum and over the total digestive tract of growing-finishing pigs. J. Animal Sci. 52:557–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Reece, F.N., Lott, B.D., Deaton, J.W. 1985. The effects of feed form, grinding method, energy level, and gender on broiler performance in a moderate (21°C) environment. Poultry Sci. 64:1834–1839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Srinivasan, R., Singh, V. 2008. Pericarp fiber separation from corn flour using sieving and air classification. Cereal Chem. 85:27–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Svihus, B., Kløvstad, K.H., Perez, V., Zimonja, O., Sahlstrom, S., Schüller, R. B., Jeksrud, W. K., Prestløkken, E. 2004. Physical and nutritional effects of pelleting of broiler chicken diets made from wheat ground to different coarsenesses by the use of roller mill and hammer mill. Animal Feed Sci. and Technol. 117:281–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Svihus, B., Klovstad, K.H., Perez, V., Zimonja, O., Sahlstrom, S., Schuller, R.B., Svihus, B., Uhlenb, A.K., Harstad, O.M. 2005. Effect of starch granule structure, associated components and processing on nutritive value of cereal starch: A review. Animal Feed Sci. and Technol. 122:303–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. van den Borne, J.J.G.C., Schrama, J.W., Heetkamp, M.J.W., Verstegen, M.W.A., Gerrits, W.J.J. 2007. Synchronizing the availability of amino acids and glucose increases protein retention in pigs. Animal 1:666–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wondra, K.J., Hancock, J.D., Behnke, K.C., Hines, R.H., Stark, C.R. 1995a. Effects of particle size and pelleting on growth-performance, nutrient digestibility, and stomach morphology in finishing pigs. J. Animal Sci. 73:757–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wondra, K.J., Hancock, J.D., Behnke, K.C., Stark, C.R. 1995b. Effects of mill type and particle size uniformity on growth-performance, nutrient digestibility, and stomach morphology in finishing pigs. J. Animal Sci. 73:2564–2573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wu, Y.V., Stringfellow, A.C. 1992. Air classification of flours from wheat with varying hardness — protein shifts. Cereal Chem. 69:188–191.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2013

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Animal Production, Faculty of AgricultureMu’tah UniversityKarakJordan

Personalised recommendations