Effect of domestic cooking methods on physicochemical, nutritional and sensory properties of different varieties of brown rice from Southern Thailand and Malaysia

Consumption of brown rice is increasing on account of higher nutritional components such as vitamins, minerals, fibres and antioxidants than white rice. However, the effect of domestic cooking methods on nutritional attributes of brown rice is not well-characterized. Hence, this study aimed to investigate the effect of cooking methods; pressure cooker (PC) and rice cooker (RC) on physicochemical, nutritional and sensory properties of brown rice from five different varieties: Sungyod (SY), Chiang (CH), and Lepnok (LP) of Thai and long grain LS1 and LS2 of Malaysian origin. Peak viscosity (PV) and final viscosity (FV) among uncooked samples were significantly different except for LS1 and LS2. Between cooking methods, protein content (8.17 – 10.14%) was significantly different (p < 0.05) except in SY, LS1 and LS2 varieties whereas fat (1.74 – 2.71%) and ash content (1.15 – 1.46%) showed significant difference (p < 0.05) only in LP and SY varieties. Loss of iron was significantly higher in RC method than PC method but zinc and thiamine was insignificant. The LS1 and LS2 cooked in PC was significantly softer (p < 0.05) than cooked in RC. Hardness of PC cooked rice was correlated with PV (r = –0.965), breakdown viscosity (r = –0.973), setback viscosity (r = –0.944) at p < 0.01 and pasting temperature (r = 0.89, p < 0.05) of uncooked brown rice flours. Overall, PC was found better over RC in terms of cooking time, textural properties, nutrients and sensory attributes

What Makes a Better Smeller?

Olfaction is often viewed as difficult, yet the empirical evidence suggests a different picture. A closer look shows people around the world differ in their ability to detect, discriminate, and name odors. This gives rise to the question of what influences our ability to smell. Instead of focusing on olfactory deficiencies, this review presents a positive perspective by focusing on factors that make someone a better smeller. We consider three driving forces in improving olfactory ability: one's biological makeup, one's experience, and the environment. For each factor, we consider aspects proposed to improve odor perception and critically examine the evidence; as well as introducing lesser discussed areas. In terms of biology, there are cases of neurodiversity, such as olfactory synesthesia, that serve to enhance olfactory ability. Our lifetime experience, be it typical development or unique training experience, can also modify the trajectory of olfaction. Finally, our odor environment, in terms of ambient odor or culinary traditions, can influence odor perception too. Rather than highlighting the weaknesses of olfaction, we emphasize routes to harnessing our olfactory potential

Redescription Of Two Species Of Pseudodiaptomus From Asia And Australia Of The Female Genital Structure And Zoogeography Of Indo west Pacific Species

Volume: 115Start Page: 650End Page: 66

Who shapes the politics of expertise? Co-production and authoritative knowledge in Thailand’s political forests

Expert environmental knowledge has often been described as a governmental rationality that reduces political debate and facilitates state control. In this paper, I argue instead that this line of reasoning simplifies how knowledge gains political authority, especially when expertise is shared and left unchallenged by diverse actors, including those in conflict with each other. Using the framework of co-production from Science and Technology Studies (STS), I apply this argument to conflicts over the supposed watershed functions of forests in Thailand, where simplified narratives about the impacts of land use on water supply are used as justifications for territorialisation and restrictions on forest land. In particular, I focus on local resistance to the proposed Kaeng Sua Ten dam in northern Thailand in order to demonstrate how protestors have deliberately reproduced formal expertise to empower themselves, but by so doing also reinforcing simplified visions of watershed science and community culture. I argue that exposing the co-production of authoritative knowledge and visions of social order offer greater opportunities for understanding the role of expertise as a political force than analysing competing assemblages based on oppositions of state-led expert knowledge and traditional local practices