DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

유기쌀과 일반쌀의 품질, 이화학적 특성 및 기능성 비교

Comparison of Quality, Physiochemical and Functional Property between Organic and Conventional Rice

  • 박장현 (전라남도 농업기술원 식품연구소) ;
  • 남승희 (전라남도 농업기술원 식품연구소) ;
  • 김영옥 (전라남도 농업기술원 식품연구소) ;
  • 권오도 (전라남도 농업기술원 쌀연구소) ;
  • 안귀남 (전라남도 농업기술원 쌀연구소)
  • Park, Jang-Hyun (Food Research Institute, Jeonnam Agricultural Research & Extension Services) ;
  • Nam, Seung-Hee (Food Research Institute, Jeonnam Agricultural Research & Extension Services) ;
  • Kim, Young-Ok (Food Research Institute, Jeonnam Agricultural Research & Extension Services) ;
  • Kwon, Oh-Do (Rice Research Institute, Jeonnam Agricultural Research & Extension Services) ;
  • An, Kyu-Nam (Rice Research Institute, Jeonnam Agricultural Research & Extension Services)
  • 투고 : 2009.11.03
  • 심사 : 2010.04.08
  • 발행 : 2010.05.31

초록

일반재배 및 유기재배로 생산된 쌀의 품질 및 이화학적 특성, 기능성 및 관능평가에 대한 결과는 다음과 같다. 쌀 품질 분석 결과, 일반 쌀이 유기재배 쌀보다 6% 완전립 비율이 높고 쇄미 등 불완전립 비율이 낮았으며, 이화학적 특징인 아밀로스, 단백질, 취반미 윤기특성, 산가 등은 일반 쌀에 비해 유기재배 쌀이 약간 양호하였으나, 알칼리 붕괴도와 아미노산 Asp, Ser, Glu, Ala, Leu, Arg는 일반 쌀과 유기재배 쌀 간에 차이가 거의 없었다. 그러나 Thr, Val, Ile, Met, Phe, Lys, His 아미노산은 유기재배 쌀이 일반 쌀보다 함량이 많은 경향을 볼 수 있었다. 아미노산 성분중 일반 쌀과 유기재배 쌀의 무기성분 중 칼슘 같은 다량 성분은 차이가 없었지만, 붕소, 망간, 철, 아연 4가지 미량요소는 유기재배 쌀에서 1.1~2.7 mg/100 g 함량이 더 많았다. 기능성 조사 결과, 총 페놀화합물과 phytic acid 함량은 유기재배 쌀에서 89%와 23% 각각 더 많았고 항산화 활성도 유기재배 쌀에서 일반 쌀보다 4% 더 높게 나왔다. 관능평가 결과, 쌀 찰기, 맛, 식미감 분야에서 일반 쌀이 유기재배 쌀보다 밥맛이 우수한 것으로 조사되었다.

The differences between organic and conventional rice were studied from the point of view of quality, physiochemical property and functionality. It was concluded that organic rice showed a 6% lower complete rice ratio than conventional rice. However, organic rice exhibited more excellent physiochemical property on amylose or protein content, Toyo value, and acidity with 17.5%, 6.6%, 8.12%, and 8.7%, respectively. There was no difference between two kinds of rice on alkali digestion value and amino acids contents such as Asp, Ser, Glu, Ala, Leu, Arg. Among inorganic compounds of rice, four compounds including B, Mn, Fe, or Zn were slightly higher at organic rice with 1.1~2.7 mg/100 g, compared to conventional rice. Interestingly, total phenolic acid and phytic acid content were 89% or 23% higher at organic rice than conventional rice, respectively. MeOH extract from organic rice showed higher antioxidant activity with 26% than that of conventional rice with 22%. In contrast, conventional rice was favored than organic rice on stickness, taste, palatability fields at sensory evaluation.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. National Statistical office. 2004. Statistical annual report (Korea). p 22.
  2. Ha TY. 2002. Nutritional and functional properties of rice. Proceedings of the Korean Society of Postharvest Science and Technology of Agricultural Products Conference. p 64-71.
  3. Grapo PA, Reaven G, Olefsky J. 1977. Postprandial plasmaglucose and plasma-insulin response to different complex carbohydrate. Diabetes 26: 1178-1183. https://doi.org/10.2337/diabetes.26.12.1178
  4. Kim IH, Chun HS, Ha TY, Moon TH. 1995. Effect of processing on the antimutagenecity of rice. Korean J Food Sci Technol 27: 944-949.
  5. Chun HS, Kim TH, Kim YJ, Kim KH. 1994. Inhibitory effect of rice extract on the chemically induced mutagenesis. Korean J Food Sci Technol 26: 188-194.
  6. Brandt K, Molgaard JP. 2001. Organic agriculture: Does it enhance or reduce the nutritional value of plant foods? J Sci Food Agric 81: 924-931. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.903
  7. Lee SJ, Sohn SM. 2005. Review on nutritional value of organic plant products. Thends in Agric Life Sci 3: 35-42.
  8. Na GS, Lee SK, Kim SY. 2007. Antioxidative effects and quality characteristics of the rice cultivated by organic farming and ordinary farming. J Kor Soc Appl Biol Chem 50: 36-41.
  9. Park YH, Kang YS, Lee JH. 1995. Marketable value and quality of rice producted by rice-duck farming system. Korean J Intl Agric 10: 107-112.
  10. Han LZ, Koh HJ, Won YJ, Choi HC, Nan ZH. 1999. Comparison of grain quality characteristics between japonica rices of Korea and Jilin province of China. Korean J Breeding 31: 48-56.
  11. Kim KH, Joo HK. 1990. Variation of grain quality of rice varieties grown at different locations. I. Locational variation of quality-related characteristics of rice grain. Korean J Crop Sci 35: 137-145
  12. Juliano BO. 1971. A simplified assay for milled rice amylose. Cereal Sci Today 16: 334-340.
  13. 남궁배, 황진봉. 2006. 친환경농산물의 성분함량 및 품질상의 차별성 연구. 한국식품연구원. p 81-82.
  14. Choe JS, Ahn HH, Nam HJ. 2002. Comparison of nutritional composition in Korean rices. J Korean Soc Food Sci Nutr 31: 885-892. https://doi.org/10.3746/jkfn.2002.31.5.885
  15. Kyoun OY, Oh SH, Kim HJ, Lee JH, Kim HC, Yoon WK, Kim HM, Kim MR. 2006 Analyses of nutrients and antinutrients of rice cultivars. Korean J Food Cookery Sci 22: 949-956.
  16. Wheeler BL, Ferrel RE. 1971. A method for phytic acid determination in wheat and wheat fractions. Cereal Chem 48: 312.
  17. Choi Y, Kim MH, Shin JJ, Park JM, Lee J. 2003. The antioxidant activities of the some commercial teas. J Korean Soc Food Sci Nutr 32: 723-727. https://doi.org/10.3746/jkfn.2003.32.5.723
  18. Kim KJ, Kim KH. 1987. Study on the physico-chemical properties of rice grain harvested from different regions. Korean J Crop Sci 32: 234-242.
  19. Kim KH, Joo HK. 1990. Variation of grain quality of rice varieties grown at different location. Korean J Crop Sci 35: 137-145.
  20. Kim YD, Ha KY, Lee JH, Shin HT, Cho SY. 1998. Relationship between palatability evaluation and its related to major characteristics of Korean developed Japonioca rice. Korean J Breeding 30: 62-63.
  21. Song BH, Kim DY, Kim SK, Kim YD, Choi KS. 1988. Distribution of amino acids and fatty acids within the degermed brown rice kernel. J Korean Agric Chem 31: 7-21.
  22. Lee YT, Kim JK, Ha SH, Cho HS, Suh SC. 2010. Analyses of nutrient composition in genetically modified ${\beta}$-carotene biofortified rice. J Korean Soc Food Sci Nutr 39: 105-109. https://doi.org/10.3746/jkfn.2010.39.1.105
  23. Caris VC, Borel P. 2004. Influence of organic versus conventional agricultural practice on the antioxdant microconstituent content of tomato and derived purees. J Agric Food Chem 52: 21-26. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf0343480
  24. Levite D, Adrian M, Tamm L. 2000. Preliminary results of resveratrol in wine of organic and conventional vineyards. Proceeding 6th International Congress on Orgaic Horticulture. p 256-257.
  25. Rickar SE, Thompsin LU. 1997. Interaction and biological effects of phytic acid. Antinutrient and Phytochemicals in Food ACS Symposium Series 662. p 294-312. https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-1997-0662.ch017

피인용 문헌

  1. Comparison of Nutritional and Physicochemical Quality of Rice Under Organic and Standard Production Systems vol.93, pp.5, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1094/CCHEM-01-16-0001-R
  2. Quantitative analyses of individual γ-Oryzanol (Steryl Ferulates) in conventional and organic brown rice (Oryza sativa L.) vol.55, pp.3, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcs.2012.01.005
  3. Comparison of Rice Properties Between Rice Grown Under Conventional Farming and One Grown Under Eco-Friendly Farming Using Hairy Vetch vol.39, pp.11, 2010, https://doi.org/10.3746/jkfn.2010.39.11.1684
  4. The Physicochemical Characteristics of Rice Flour with Different Milling Degree of Rice Cultivar "Deuraechan" vol.30, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.9724/kfcs.2014.30.2.139
  5. Factors influencing antioxidant compounds in rice vol.57, pp.5, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2014.922046
  6. Comparison of Physicochemical Properties and Antioxidant Activities of Naturally-Fermented Commercial Rice Vinegars Produced in Korea, China, and Japan vol.44, pp.12, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3746/jkfn.2015.44.12.1799
  7. Comparison of the content of bioactive substances and antioxidative activity between conventionally and organically cultivated brown rice (Oryza sativa L.) vol.24, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.11002/kjfp.2017.24.3.334
  8. Wetland Function Evaluation and Expert Assessment of Organic Rice-Fish Mixed Farming System vol.20, pp.2, 2010, https://doi.org/10.17663/jwr.2018.20.2.161
  9. 유기 셀레늄 (Organic Selenium) 엽면처리에 의한 셀레늄 강화 쌀 개발 vol.38, pp.1, 2010, https://doi.org/10.5338/kjea.2019.38.1.6
  10. 현미죽 적합 품종 선정을 위한 현미 품종별 이화학적 특성 vol.33, pp.2, 2010, https://doi.org/10.9799/ksfan.2020.33.2.204
  11. 토양검정에 의한 유기자원 시비처방이 양배추의 생육 및 양분이용효율에 미치는 영향 vol.39, pp.2, 2010, https://doi.org/10.5338/kjea.2020.39.2.13
  12. The Effect of Degree of Milling on the Nutraceutical Content in Ecofriendly and Conventional Rice ( Oryza sativa L.) vol.9, pp.9, 2010, https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9091297
  13. Green Labelled Rice Shows a Higher Nutritional and Physiochemical Quality Than Conventional Rice in China vol.10, pp.5, 2010, https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10050915