Hypotheses in Food Science

Nutritional and Nutraceutical Properties of

Concise Reviews &

Triticum dicoccum Wheat and Its Health Benefits:
An Overview
Srinu Dhanavath and U.J.S. Prasada Rao

Abstract: Triticum dicoccum wheat is one of the ancient wheat species and is gaining popularity due to its suggested health
benefits as well as its suitability for organic farming. In some parts of the world, certain traditional foods prepared with
dicoccum wheat are preferred due to their better taste, texture, and flavor. It is rich in bioactive compounds and its starch
has been reported to have slow digestibility. However, content and composition of bioactive compounds is reported to
vary depending on the geographical location, seasonal variations, varieties used, and the analytical methods followed.
Therefore, in the present study, we report the food uses, digestibility of starch, nutritional and nutraceutical compositions
of dicoccum wheat grown in different parts of the world, and also its health benefits in ameliorating diabetes and celiac
disease.

Keywords: dicoccum wheat, health benefits, nutraceuticals, nutritional characteristics, starch digestibility

Introduction vary depending on the geographical location and varieties. There-

Grains are rich in nutrients and nutraceuticals. The U.S. Dept.
of Health and Human Services and U.S. Dept. of Agriculture has
recommended increased intake of whole grain foods to reduce
the risk of chronic diseases (Dietary Guidelines for Americans
2015). Among the grains, wheat is widely used as a staple food
for various preparations by the majority of the world population
and it is a major source of protein for vegetarian population. The
total world wheat production in 2014 to 2015 was reported to be
730.8 million metric tons (FAO 2017) and it is unique among the
cereals because of its ability to form viscoelastic properties. Due to
this unique functional property, a variety of products are prepared
using wheat in different parts of the world. Wheat-based products
are important staple foods for several billion people in more than
100 countries (Shewry 2009).
With increasing evidence of the role of diet in reducing the risk
of chronic diseases, consumers prefer grains with more dietary fiber
(DF) and antioxidants and low glycemic index (GI) foods. Among
the different species of wheat, ancient wheat species are viewed as
healthy grains. Therefore, nowadays there is a renewed interest on
adapting ancient wheat in to human food system. These species are
usually grown in organic farming system compared to common
wheat. Triticum dicoccum is one of the ancient wheat species and
it was the most favored wheat for bread making in ancient Egypt
(Shewry 2009; Peng and others 2011). Due to suggested health
benefits and its suitability for organic farming, dicoccum wheat is
making a comeback. Emmer bread is available in Switzerland and
in Italy, and emmer bread (pane di farro) can be found in bakeries
in some areas (Cooper 2015). It is rich in bioactive compounds,
high in DF, and its starch is reported to have slow digestibility
(Mohan and Malleshi 2006; Lachman and others 2012). However,
content and composition of bioactive compounds is reported to
JFDS-2016-2138 Submitted 12/21/2016, Accepted 7/17/2017. Authors are and Goel 2015). Durum wheat is milled into semolina for pasta
with the Dept. of Biochemistry, CSIR – Central Food Technological Research products and Indian traditional products like rawa idly, upma, and
Institute, Mysore, 570 020, Karnataka, India. Direct inquiries to author Rao
(E-mail: prasadarao_ummiti@yahoo.com).
fore, the scope of the review is to discuss food uses, digestibility
of starch, nutritional and nutraceutical compositions of dicoccum
wheat grown in different parts of the world, and also its health
benefits.
Different Wheat Species and Their Importance
Different wheat species cultivated in different parts of the world
are hexaploid bread wheat: Triticum aestivum (2n = 6x = 42;
genome: AABBDD); tetraploid hard or durum wheat: Triticum
durum (2n = 4x = 28; genome: AABB); and Triticum dicoccum or
emmer wheat (2n = 4x = 28; genome: AABB). Evolution of
these wheat species are shown in Figure 1. Triticum dicoccum is the
domesticated form derived from Triticum dicoccoides (wild emmer
wheat).
Triticum aestivum wheat is the most widely grown in the world
(Kazi and others 2007) and it contributes about 95% of the world
wheat production and the remaining 5% is mainly contributed by
Triticum durum and ancient wheat like Triticum dicoccum (emmer)
(Shewry 2009).
Triticum aestivum is rightly called the “king of cereals” or “golden
grain” (Mohan and Malleshi 2006). A number of aestivum wheat
varieties are grown in the world. Based on the season of culti-
vation, these are classified as winter or spring wheat. Based on
grain hardness and dough characteristics, they are classified as hard
(strong), medium strong, and soft wheat. Due to high content
of gluten protein and its composition, hard wheat varieties are
more suitable for the preparation of bread while soft wheat vari-
eties are used for the preparation of cakes and biscuits. Medium
strong wheat varieties are suitable for the preparation of chapati,
an unleavened bread and roti (Ram and Nigam 1981).
Durum wheat or macaroni wheat is known as “bansi” and
“kathia” in India (Agrawal 1963), and it contributes about 4% of
the Indian wheat production (Annual Report 2012–13; Grewal
halwa. Its high protein and gluten content, as well as its dough
strength, make durum for the preparation of pasta products, viz.,

C 2017 Institute of Food Technologists

 R

doi: 10.1111/1750-3841.13844 Vol. 82, Nr. 10, 2017 r Journal of Food Science 2243
Further reproduction without permission is prohibited
Hypotheses in Food Science
Concise Reviews & Health benefits of dicoccum wheat . . .
Triticum urartu χ Aegilops speltoides
Wild diploid wheat ; genome - AA goat grass1; genome - BB; 2n = 2x = 14
2n = 2x = 14
Triticum dicocccoides χ Aegilops tauschii
Wild emmer - AABB
Wild
Cultivated
Triticum dicoccum
Cultivated emmer - AABB
Hulled or enclosed grains
Free threshing grains Triticum durum
AABB
vermicelli, spaghetti, noodles, and macaroni products. Durum
wheat is also used for the preparation of leavened or unleavened
bread, cooked steamed bulgur (cracked durum wheat), and frekeh
(parched immature wheat kernel) (Dick and Matsuo 1988). How-
ever, durum wheat is not suitable for cakes and chapati as it is hard
wheat.
Dicoccum Wheat and Its Production
Triticum dicoccum, the hulled wheat, is one of the ancient species
in the world. By the beginning of the 20th century, higher-
yielding wheat strains had replaced emmer almost everywhere. Its
cultivation was reduced to a few thousand square meters in moun-
tainous regions of Europe and Asia. However, there is a renewed
interest in dicoccum wheat largely by producers and consumers
because of its better organoleptic value as well as health benefits
compared to other species (Fares and others, 2008). It has been
reported to be organoleptically, nutritionally, and therapeutically
superior compared to commercially available bread wheat and
durum wheat (Lachman and others 2012; Hammed and Simsek
2014). Therefore, it is making a comeback in Italy and other parts
of the world (Damania and others 1992). Currently, its share in
the world wheat production is about 1% (Peng and others 2011).
It should be noted that the world total wheat production varied
between 699 and 730 million metric tons between 2011 and 2014
(FAO 2015), and hence the world production of dicoccum wheat
is estimated to be around 7 million metric tons.
Dicoccum wheat is grown in Morocco, Spain, the Carpathian
Mountains on the border of the Czech and Slovak republics,
Albania, Turkey, Switzerland, and Italy. However, the production
data in most of these countries are not available. In India and Italy,
its cultivation is well established and expanding. In India, its pro-
duction is about 1% of the whole wheat production and it is pro-
2244 Journal of Food Science r Vol. 82, Nr. 10, 2017
Figure 1–The evolution of wheat, from the
prehistoric Stone Age grasses to modern
macaroni wheat and bread wheat (adopted from
New Hall Mill; http://www.newhallmill.org.uk/
wht-evol.htm; and also adopted few modifications
shown by Peng and others 2011).
goat grass2 - DD
Triticum spelta
Spelt - AABBDD
Triticum aestivum
bread wheat - AABBDD
duced in the states of Maharashtra, Karnataka, Gujarat, and in some
parts of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu (Annual Report 2012–
13; Grewal and Goel 2015). In Italy, around 2500 ha of dicoccum
was cultivated with a yield of about 3.5 ton/ha (Troccoli and
Codianni 2005). In Turkey, dicoccum wheat is still cultivated for
its high adaptability to poor soils by farmers who live in marginal
areas in Kastamonu and Sinop provinces in the Black Sea region,
at above sea level of 1000 to 2000 m (Koksel and Cetiner 2015).
Historical Importance of Dicoccum Wheat
The archaeological record indicates that domesticated dicoccum
(emmer) wheats appeared about 8000 to 9000 BC in the Prepot-
tery Neolithic period. Emmer has been used as a staple food by
prehistoric, Etruscan and Roman populations until it was largely
replaced by the modern bread wheat during the late Roman Em-
pire (D’Antuono 1994). It was rarely grown wheat in submon-
tane and montane areas in Caucasus, Baskyria, on the Balkans,
Spain, Turkey, Iran, Yemen, India, Morocco, and Ethiopia. A
lot of landraces are grown in Italy (Galterio and others 1994;
Perrino and others 1996; Pisante and others 1996; D’Antuono
and others 1998). Dicoccum is reported to be evolved from wild
emmer (Triticum dicoccoides; AABB), which was produced from the
hybridization of diploid wheat (AA) and goat grass (DD) (Figure 1)
(Darlington 1969; Pagnotta and others 2005). In Italy, Triticum dic-
occum is generally called “farro” (Szabo and Hammer 1996). In
India, it is popularly known as “samba,” “javegodi,” “sadaka,” or
“khapli” (Agrawal 1963).
Suitability of dicoccum wheat for organic farming
Organic farming has gained importance in developed coun-
tries and gaining popularity in developing countries of the world
as it is environmentally friendly and yield more nutritious foods

Health benefits of dicoccum wheat . . .
Table 1–Proximate composition of dicoccum wheat.
Components Content (%) References
Moisture 8.3 to 16.3 1, 2, 3, 8
Protein 11.2 to 22.7 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14
Fat 1.14 to 3.80 1, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10
Ash 0.85 to 2.46 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14
Crude fiber 0.81 to 1.71 3, 8, 9
Total carbohydrate 78.00 to 83.22 1, 8
References: 1. Patil and Yenagi (2002), 2. Giacintucci and others (2014), 3. Supekar and
others (2005), 4. Oak and others (2011), 5. Suchowilska and others (2009), 6. Galterio
and others (2003), 7. Giambanelli and others (2013), 8. Bhuvaneshwari and others
(2001), 9. Brandolini and others (2008), 10. Grausgruber and others (2004), 11.
Pagnotta and others (2009), 12. Dhanavath and others (2016), 13. Nadaf (2010), 14.
Loje and others (2003).
that contain less or no pesticide residues. Dicoccum wheat can
grow in soils with limited fertility (D’Antuono 1989), even in
cold climates (Sherma and others 1981; Blanco and others 1990).
Experiments on physiology of drought resistance in T. dicoccum
and other primitive wheats indicated that dicoccum was moder-
ately resistant to moisture stress (Chinoy 1961). Resistance to rust
disease of dicoccum wheat has been reported by different workers
(Mithal and Koppar 1990; Damania and others 1992). Dicoccum
wheat adapts well to high temperature stress which may be at-
tributed to genetic makeup and morphophysiological mechanism
(Hejcman and Hejcmanova 2015).
The increasing attention to sustainable agriculture and the de-
mand for organic foods has renewed the interest in emmer wheat
(Galterio and others 2003) due to its ability to grow in soils with
low fertility using low-input techniques (D’Antuono and Minelli
1998).
Triticum dicoccum has been investigated in particular as an alter-
native low-yielding cereal that is suitable for marginal areas and
organic farming due to its high resistance against disease, low
nitrogen and water requirement, and a high competitive ability
against weeds in comparison to T. aestivum (Marino and others
2009, Konvalina and others 2012a, 2012b).
Nutritional Factors of Dicoccum Wheat
Nutritional properties are affected by genotype, environmental
conditions, farming methods, variety, and analytical methods used
for their estimation. Therefore, proximate composition of dicoc-
cum reported by different workers from different regions varied,
hence minimum and maximum values are given.
Proximate composition
Dicoccum wheat was reported have high nutritive value. Proxi-
mate composition reveals the content of major nutrients like crude
protein, fat, carbohydrate, and minor nutrient like mineral (ash)
content. It also reveals the crude fiber content. Dicoccum wheat is
rich in protein, carbohydrate, minerals, and poor in fats (Table 1),
and therefore, it is recognized as a very healthy cereal. The mois-
ture content varied between 8.3% and 16.3% and ash content
varied between 0.85% and 2.46% (DW), respectively. Spring em-
mer wheat was reported to have higher content of moisture and
ash contents compared to autumn emmer wheat (Giacintucci and
others 2014). In general, cereals are low in fat content. Crude fat
content in dicoccum wheat was reported to range from 1.14%
to 3.80%. Suchowilska and others (2009) reported the fatty acid
composition of dicoccum wheat grown in Poland, and found that
palmitic acid (C16; 16.9%), oleic acid (18:1; 24.8%), and linoleic
acid (C18:2; 51.9%) were reported to be predominant in dicoc-
cum wheat and they constitute about 94% of the total fat with
Hypotheses in Food Science
Concise Reviews &
Table 2–Starch and amylose content of dicoccum wheat.
Components Content References
Starch (%) 48.9 to 65.3 1, 2, 3, 4
Total amylose (%) 19.4 to 26.3 1, 2, 3, 5
SDS (% of starch) 44.7 to 53.8 3
RS (% of starch) 17.1 to 21.2 3
In vitro carbohydrate digestibility∗ 40.4 to 47.1 1
In vitro protein digestibility (%) 71.5 to 80.5 1
SDS, slowly digestible starch; RS, resistant starch; ∗ , mg glucose/100 mg sample for
60 min.
References: 1. Bhuvaneshwari and others (2004), 2. Mohan and Malleshi (2006), 3.
Galterio and others (2003), 4. Grausgruber and others (2004), 5. Brandolini and others
(2008).
a polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA)/monounsaturated fatty acid
(MUFA) ratio of 2.22. Earlier, Chang and Huang (1998) reported
that rats fed with diet containing PUFA-to-MUFA ratio above
2, showed beneficial effects with respect to low plasma and liver
cholesterol levels. Dicoccum wheat had higher concentrations of
Se, Fe, and Zn compared to other wheat species (Galterio and
others 2003; Supekar and others 2005; Suchowilska and others
2012). Supekar and others (2005) reported Fe content of 4.3 to
9.8 mg/100g and Zn content of 3.3 to 6.9 mg/100g in different
dicoccum varieties. Galterio and others (2003) reported selenium
content of 6 μg in 100 g flour in Italian dicoccum wheat. The
content of major nutrients like protein and carbohydrate, and their
properties are discussed in the following sections.
Carbohydrates in dicoccum wheat
Carbohydrates are the most important biological molecules
which are the main energy source for living bodies. In dicoccum
wheat, carbohydrate content varied in different varieties from dif-
ferent regions and they ranged from 78% to 83% (Table 1). Starch is
the major constituent of carbohydrate which was reported to range
between 48.9% and 65.3% (Table 2). Starch consists of amylose,
a linear polymer of glucose with 1 to 4 linkage and amylopectin,
a branched polymer of glucose with 1 to 4 linkage joined with
1 to 6 branch point. Amylose-to-amylopectin ratio is an impor-
tant parameter which influences the starch digestibility. The flours
containing high amylose content are more resistant to starch di-
gestion (Singh and others 2010). There was a variation in total
amylose content in dicoccum wheat with a range of 19.4% to
26.3% (Table 2).
The reducing sugar content in dicoccum wheat of different
varieties grown in different geographical locations was found to
vary between 0.09% and 1%. Bhuvaneshwari and others (2004)
reported the reducing sugar values between 0.09% and 0.19%
for 8 dicoccum wheat varieties grown in Dharwad region of
India. Three dicoccum wheat varieties grown in another sea-
son in Dharwad and Arabhavi regions of Karnataka, India, were
reported to range from 0.20 to 0.22 and 0.11 to 0.24, respectively
(Nadaf 2010). On the other hand, Supekar and others (2005) re-
ported 0.91% to 0.97% for 2 varieties grown in Pune region of
Maharashtra, India. Recently, Žilić and others (2017) reported the
reducing sugar content of 1.01% for dicoccum grown in Belgrade,
Serbia.
Reducing sugars and free amino acids are involved in Maillard
reaction, and the products formed in this reaction are diverse.
Acrylamide, a toxic product of the Maillard reaction, is formed in
food products during their processing due to the reaction between
reducing sugar like glucose and asparagine at temperature above
120 °C. It has been reported that the rate of acrylamide formation
Vol. 82, Nr. 10, 2017 r Journal of Food Science 2245
Hypotheses in Food Science
Concise Reviews & Health benefits of dicoccum wheat . . .
by the reaction of various reducing sugars with asparagine ranked
as follows: glucose > fructose > xylose > galactose > maltose >
lactose (Wang and Xu 2014). Thus, varieties having high amount
of glucose form more acrylamide, while disaccharides like mal-
tose or lactose form less acrylamide. Recently, Žilić and others
(2017) reported the composition of reducing sugar in dicoccum
wheat. Among the various sugars identified, glucose content was
0.12%, fructose and galactose contents were 0.11% and 0.12%, re-
spectively, while maltose content was 0.63%. Thus, more reactive
reducing sugar, that is, glucose content, was low and less reactive
reducing sugar like maltose content was the highest in dicoc-
cum wheat. However, other investigators have not determined
the composition of reducing sugar.
Protein content, composition, and their influence on food
quality
Protein content in dicoccum wheat ranged from 11.2% to 22.7%
(Table 1). Suchowilska and others (2009) reported high protein
content of 22.7% in dicoccum wheat from Poland. Giacintucci
and others (2014) reported the total protein content of 14.4% in
spring emmer, while in autumnal emmer wheat, it was found to
be 11.2%. Supekar and others (2005) compared the nutritional
properties of 3 different species of wheat and reported that dic-
occum wheats contain higher amount of gluten (12.4% to 12.7%)
compared to other wheat species grown in the Maharashtra region
of India. However, in Italian spring and autumn emmer wheats,
the gluten contents were 10.7% and 9.04%, respectively, which
were lower than the values reported in India. The ratio between
gliadin to glutenin, which are the constituents of gluten, was more
in spring wheat (0.40) compared to autumn wheat (0.36). Lysine
is the limiting amino acid similar to other cereals. However, the
total proportion of the amino acids in grains was higher in emmer
wheat landraces, which is due to high protein content in grain
(Konvalina and others 2011). The in vitro protein digestibility of
dicoccum ranged from 72% to 81% indicating its better digestibil-
ity (Bhuvaneshwari and others 2004).
Although dicoccum has been traditionally consumed in the
form of bread in Italy, Turkey, and Switzerland, due to its
low gluten strength, it is not popularly used for the prepa-
ration of bread and other leavened products. Although it has
high gluten content, several researchers reported that the em-
mer wheat do not yield good quality bread (Piergiovanni
and others 1996). This may be due to the absence of high
molecular weight-glutenin subunits (HMWGS) like 5 + 10
subunits, which are reported to be responsible for superior bread
dough characteristics. Oak and others (2011) reported that dic-
occum wheat varieties had lower dough development time and
lower dough resistance as well as lower work inputs. They did
not find clear relationship between HMWGS composition and
micro-sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS) sedimentation volume as
well as mixograph properties (gluten strength). However, based
on low molecular weight-glutenin subunit compositions and mi-
crostructural characteristics of the grain flour and gluten network
of different Italian wheat varieties, Giacintucci and others (2014)
speculated that some of the landraces in central Italy may be suit-
able for bread making.
Bhuvaneshwari and others (2005) reported that the vermicelli
prepared from 8 dicoccum varieties, 3 released verities (NP-200,
DDK-1001,and DDK-1009) and 5 prereleased varieties (MACS-
2920, DDK-1016 and MACS-2912, DDK-1013 and 278-13),
showed fair to good quality. Among these, DDK-1001, DDK-
1009, and DDK-1013 showed a good quality with low percent
2246 Journal of Food Science r Vol. 82, Nr. 10, 2017
of solubility and firmer strands similar to durum wheat vermi-
celli. They reported that high amount of wet gluten content and
presence of ω-35 and γ -45 gliadin in these varieties may be re-
sponsible for better vermicelli cooking quality.
Food uses of dicoccum wheat and nutritional quality
of some foods
Dicoccum wheat has been traditionally used for pasta produc-
tion in Italy and Egypt (Galterio and others 2001), soup in Italy,
Turkey, and Switzerland, and for beer production in some coun-
tries (Papa 1996; Samuel 1996; Cooper 2015). In India, semolina
obtained from dicoccum wheat has been used for the prepara-
tion of Indian traditional foods like upma, dalia, madeli, kesaribath
(shira), semia (vermicelli), and chiroti (Ranga Rao and others 1981;
Bhuvaneshwari and others 2005). Traditionally, it was also used
to prepare unconventional foods like baby foods (Zaharieva and
others 2010). The traditional products of dicoccum wheat vari-
eties have better taste, texture, and flavor. Semolina prepared from
dicoccum wheat was reported to have better cooking quality com-
pared to aestivum wheat and similar cooking tolerance compared
to durum wheat (Ranga Rao and others 1981).
Supekar and others (2005) reported that organoleptic scores of
chapati prepared from dicoccum wheats were found to be lower
compared to that of aestivum and mentioned that the low scores
were due to high carotenoid content which imparted reddish
brown color to the chapati. Ankita and others (2010) reported that
chapati prepared with dicoccum wheat flour had high protein and
ash contents of 12.5% and 2.3%, respectively, and low fat content
of 1.32%. The dicoccum chapati had GI value of 63.8, which
can be classified under medium GI foods as per WHO guidelines.
Medium GI (56 to 69) foods include rye, brown rice, oatmeal,
popcorn, sweet corn, and other minimally processed foods, and
high GI (ࣙ70) foods include white bread, short grain rice, corn
flakes, potato, and other processed foods (ADA 2014).
Nutraceutical Properties of Dicoccum Wheat
Polyphenols and carotenoids are nutraceuticals which exhibit
various health benefits due to their antioxidant properties. These
compounds are metabolized and absorbed in humans and provide
health benefits. In addition to the antioxidant properties, these
bioactive compounds also exhibit antimicrobial and immunomod-
ulatory properties (Hammed and Simsek 2014). Polyphenol and
carotenoid contents in dicoccum wheats grown in different parts
of the world ranged from 508 to 2355 μg/g and 1.63 to 4.90 μg/g
flour, respectively (Table 3). Ferulic acid was the major phenolic
acid reported in wheat. Its content in dicoccum was reported to
vary as low as 323 μg/g to as high as 759 μg/g. Total tocol content
in Italian and Czech Republic dicoccum wheats were reported to
range between 19.7 and 67.92 μg/g (Hejtmankova and others
2010; Giambanelli and others 2013). Content of total carotenoids
in dicoccum wheat was reported to range between 1.63 and
4.90 μg/g. Among the carotenoids, lutein was the major
carotenoid identified followed by zeaxanthin (Table 3). Content
of α- and β-carotenes in dicoccum wheat was reported to be low
(Abdel-Aal and Rabalski 2008), and in some verities, α- and β-
carotenes were not detected (Hidalgo and others 2006). It should
be noted that some researchers reported β-carotene values ranging
from 3.3 to 7.4 μg/g (Bhuvaneshwari and others 2001; Supekar
and others 2005). These researchers extracted the samples with
water saturated butanol and determined carotene content by col-
orimetric methods. As the extract may contain yellow pigments
and other carotenoids, in addition to β-carotene, the values may
 Hypotheses in Food Science
Health benefits of dicoccum wheat . . .

Concise Reviews &

Table 3–Bioactive compounds in dicoccum wheat. some of the Italian dicoccum wheats, which had an average value
Components Content References of 9.8% (Gebruers and others 2008). AX is one of the major DF
components of wheat and its content in dicoccum ranged from
TPC (μg/g) 508 to 2355 1, 2, 3, 7, 9, 10 1.4% to 2.2% and its bran was reported to be rich in AX (6.1%
FA (μg/g) 323 to 759 3, 7, 9
Tocols (μg/g) 19.7 to 67.92 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11 to 14.4%) (Gebruers and others 2008: Ward and others 2008).
α-T (μg/g) 7.62 to 12.24 3, 4, 7, 8, 11 β-Glucan and lignin contents were reported to range from 0.3%
β-T (μg/g) 2.40 to 6.26 2, 3, 4, 6, 11 to 0.4% and 1.95% to 2.65%, respectively, in Italian emmer wheat
α-T3 (μg/g) 1.58 to 4.68 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11 varieties. All these components exhibit beneficial physiological
β-T3 (μg/g) 7.81 to 46.96 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11
δ-T3 (μg/g) 0.153 11
effects. For example, supplementation of AX-rich fiber (15 g/d)
Total carotenoids (μg/g) 1.63 to 4.9 2, 6, 8, 11 showed beneficial effect in people with Type-2 diabetes (Lu and
α + β- carotene (μg/g) 0.05 to 0.328 2, 8 others 2004).
Lutein (μg/g) 0.916 to 4.14 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 11
Zeaxanthin (μg/g) 0.138 to 0.604 2, 8, 11
Starch digestibility
TPC, total phenols content; FA, ferulic acid; T, tocopherol; T3, tocotrienol. Starch digestibility and glycemic index are the related param-
References: 1. Lachman and others (2012), 2. Giambanelli and others (2013), 3.
Abdel-Aal and Rabalski (2008), 4. Hejtmankova and others (2010), 5. Lampi and others eters which determine the hypoglycemic properties of a food.
Nutritional points of view, starches are classified into rapidly di-
(2008), 6. Hidalgo and others (2006), 7. Serpen and others (2008), 8. Panfili and others
(2004), 9. Li and others (2008); 10. Dhanavath and others (2016); 11. Lachman and
others (2013). gestible starches, slowly digestible starches, and resistant starches
(Englyst and others 1992). Starch that was isolated from dicoccum
Table 4–Dietary fiber and its components in dicoccum wheat. was slowly digestible and this property may be due to the complex-
Components Content (%) References
ity of the starch structure and high amylose content (Galterio and
others 2003). Low starch digestibility was also reported to be due
Total dietary fiber 7.2 to 20.7 1, 2, 3, 4 to its high degree of crystallinity and rigid architecture in the starch
Insoluble fiber 6.91 to 18.28 1
Soluble fiber 1.2 to 3.48 1
granules (Mohan and Malleshi 2006). High resistant starch con-
Total-AX 1.4 to 2.2 2, 3 tent (17.1% to 21.2%) was also responsible for its slow digestibility
Water soluble AX 0.15 to 0.55 2, 3 (Galterio and others 2003). As can be seen from Table 2, in vitro di-
β-Glucan 0.30 to 0.40 2, 4, 5 gestibility of carbohydrates of dicoccum wheat was reported to be
Lignin 1.95 to 2.65 2 40.4 to 47.1 mg glucose/100 mg sample, and this was reported to
References: 1. Bhuvaneshwari and others (2004), 2. Gebruers and others (2008), 3. be significantly lower than other species of wheat (Bhuvaneshwari
Ward and others (2008), 4. Loje and others (2003), 5. Grausgruber and others (2004).
and others 2004). Epidemiological data suggest that consump-
tion of low glycemic index diet plays a protective role against
not represent true values of β-carotene. Lutein content reported the development of Type-2 diabetes (John and Chellappa 2005;
by different workers was ranged from 0.916 to 4.14 μg/g (Table 3). Nilsson and others 2007).
Polyphenols, carotenoids, and tocols exhibit antioxidant properties
and reported to have health benefits in amelioration of cancer, car- Influence on lipid profile and blood glucose levels
diovascular disease, and diabetes. Dicoccum wheat contains high There was one study carried out by Yenagi and others (2001) on
tocopherol-to-tocotrienol (T3/T) ratio. A high T3/T ratio in the the influence of dicoccum diet on lipid profile and blood glucose
diet was reported to be important due to the hypocholesterolemic levels of diabetic subjects. Incorporation of dicoccum flour in the
action of T3 (Qureshi and others 1991). Polyphenols are also re- regular diet of diabetic patients for 6 wk reduced 11% each of
ported to inhibit α-amylase and α-glucosidase activities, which total lipids, triglycerides, and LDL cholesterol concentrations. A
result in decreased postprandial glucose level. Lutein has vari- low starch digestibility of the food appears to be a reason for
ous health benefits including in improving eye health and vision the management of hyperlipidaemia (Yenagi and others 2001).
(Carpentiera and others 2009). However, no such beneficial lipid profile was noticed with patients
supplemented with bread wheat. Data also indicate that there was
Health Benefits of Dicoccum a marginal decrease in fasting blood glucose levels in the subjects
supplemented with dicoccum wheat. However, more studies are
DF in dicoccum wheat required in animal models as well as human subjects to know the
DF is one of the most important classes of compounds in ce- beneficial effect of this wheat on diabetes and lipid profiles.
reals and it possesses positive health effects. Overall DF intake
of 30 to 35 g/d for adults was recommended (Harris and Smith Celiac disease (CD)
2006). DF is a nonstarchy polysaccharide which cannot be di- Gluten is an important functional protein, which is responsi-
gested by the enzymes in the human gastrointestinal tract and ble for the viscoelastic property of the wheat dough. Therefore,
cannot be absorbed by small intestine. But, they are completely it is difficult to prepare bread, chapati, or pasta products without
or partially digested in the large intestine. DFs include cellulose, gluten. However, consumption of wheat causes CD in susceptible
pectins, arabinoxylan (AX), glucans, and lignin. Some of the major individuals. CD is a gluten intolerance-related syndrome and it
physiological benefits of these compounds include laxation, atten- is one of the most frequent chronic gastrointestinal disorders in-
uation of blood glucose and blood cholesterol, and protection duced in susceptible individuals. Worldwide, prevalence of CD is
against cancer (DeVries and others 2001). Dicoccum wheats are estimated to be between 0.5% and 1.0%. In the Arab population
rich source of DF. As can be seen from Table 4, the total DF con- of the Western Sahara, it was reported to be 5.6% (Phillips 2010).
tent ranged from 7.2% to 20.7% and insoluble DF was the major Intestinal digestion of gluten proteins produces several peptides
component of DF (Bhuvaneshwari and others 2004; Gebruers and that can stimulate either adaptive or innate immune responses
others 2008). In most of the Indian dicoccum varieties, its content (Gianfrani and others 2005). A common characteristic of these
was higher (above 16%) (Bhuvaneshwari and others 2004) than in proteins is the presence of multiple proline and glutamine residues,

Vol. 82, Nr. 10, 2017 r Journal of Food Science 2247

Hypotheses in Food Science
Concise Reviews & Health benefits of dicoccum wheat . . .

Table 5–Proposed health benefits of dicoccum wheat.

Compound/Ingredient/ Product Health benefits References

Starch Slow digestibility and suitable for hypoglycemic foods Galterio and others (2003); Mohan
and Malleshi (2006)
Tocotrienols, polyphenols, and carotenoids Antioxidant properties Serpen and others (2008);
Hejtmankova and others (2010);
Abdel-Aal and Rabalski (2008)
Lipids profile PUFA/MUFA = 2.2 PUFA to MUFA ratio >2 shows beneficial effects with respect Chang and Huang (1998);
to low plasma and liver cholesterol levels Suchowilska and others (2009)
Dicoccum-based diet Dicoccum-based chapati reduces total lipids, triglycerides, and Strehlow and others (1994); Yenagi
LDL-cholesterol and, therefore, reduces cardiovascular risk and others (2001); Fares and others
factors; Dicoccum chapati; Medium GI food; (2008); Ankita and others (2010)
Dicoccum-based diet is recommended in the diet of people
suffering from wheat allergies, colitis, and high blood
cholesterol; Mild but effective regulator of intestinal functions
Reducing sugars Some varieties are low in total reducing sugar content and low Bhuvaneshwari and others (2004);
in monosaccharides like glucose and fructose which are more Nadaf (2010); Žilić and others
reactive to produce acrylamide during baking (2017)

making them resistant to gastrointestinal digestion. CD occurs only
in genetically predisposed individuals having HLA-DQ2 or HLA-
DQ genes (Nielsen and others 2004). It has been reported that
certain gliadin proteins, which are the constituents of gluten, trig-
ger CD. A 33-mer peptide of α-gliadin and a 26-mer peptide of
γ -gliadin are resistant to degradation by gastrointestinal proteases
and these peptides bind to HLA-DQ2 or HLA-DQ after deami-
dation at a specific glutamine residue by tissue transglutaminase
(Molberg and others 1998; Zamakhchari and others 2011). It has
been reported that some varieties of dicoccum wheat are devoid
of these noxious gluten proteins, which are responsible for CD
(Vincentini and others 2007). Dicoccum wheat is a tetraploid and
it consists of only 2 sets of different genomes, AB, while aestivum
is a hexaploid and consists of 3 sets of different genomes, ABD. As
D-genome is absent in dicoccum wheats, characteristics of gluten
proteins in dicoccum wheat are different from the common bread
wheat. Therefore, dicoccum wheat has genetic advantage with
respect to CD.
Pepsin and tryptic digests of dicoccum wheat did not exhibit
any negative effect on Caco-2/TC7 and K562(S) cells, suggest-
ing that it cannot induce cellular mechanisms implicated in the
pathogenesis of CD (Vincentini and others 2007). However, sub-
sequent study by the same research group (Vincentini and others
2009) observed variations in the immune response of mucosal T-
cells from celiac children to prolamins extracted from 9 landraces
of dicoccum wheat. T-cell lines exposed to peptic-tryptic digested
prolamins from landraces L5563, L5558, and L5540 showed neg-
ligible proliferative responses, which are beneficial and released
INF-gamma amounts similar to that of untreated control cells.
In contrast, landraces Ersa 6, Ersa 8, Leonessa 4, and Leonessa
5 proved to be very active in triggering the immune responses.
However, landraces Filosini and Prometeo exhibited an interme-
diate behavior. Differences may be due to a wide variation in both
prolamin composition and T-cell immunological activation. Thus,
some dicoccum landraces were poor or devoid of noxious gluten
proteins.
Thus, the dicoccum wheat is rich in proteins, DF, and an-
tioxidant compounds like polyphenols, tocols, and carotenoids.
Characteristic feature of its starch is that its digestibility is slower
compared to that of other modern wheat species, which are widely
used worldwide. Thus, it is recommend preparing hypoglycemic
foods, which are suitable for people suffering from diabetes. It was
also reported that some varieties of dicoccum wheat are devoid
of noxious gluten proteins; however, more immunological and
clinical research is required to establish their suitability for celiac
patients. It is also recommended in the diets of patients suffering
from high blood cholesterol (Table 5).
Factors that Influence the Contents of Different
Compounds Reported in Dicoccum Wheat
As can be seen from Table 1 to 4, the range of values for most
of the compounds is large. This could be attributed to various
factors. Some of the factors are varietal differences, variations in
soil and environmental conditions, and the analytical methods
used by different researchers. It should be noted from Table S1 that
methods followed for the determination of proximate composition
was generally either AACC methods or AOAC methods and,
therefore, variations in the contents of protein, carbohydrate, fat,
ash, and crude fiber may not be due to the methods used.
For the estimation of total starch, reducing sugar content in
the hydrolyzed starch was determined either by chemical or by
enzymatic method (Table S1). In case of total DF, most of the re-
searchers followed enzymatic gravimetric method. However, some
researchers calculated based on the difference between total sam-
ple and sum of protein, ash, lipid, free sugar, and available starch
(Table S1). Therefore, variations in estimation of starch and DF
may be contributed by methods followed in addition to other
factors mentioned earlier.
For the determination of bioactive compounds, different sol-
vents were used for their extraction. Also, for the estimation of
carotenoid and tocols, some researchers used saponification fol-
lowed by solvent extraction, while others did not use saponifi-
cation method before their extraction (Table S1). As discussed
earlier (section on nutraceutical properties of dicoccum wheat),
for the estimation β-carotene, some researchers extracted with
water saturated butanol, determined the absorbance, and calcu-
lated as per the AACC methods. Recently, high-performance liq-
uid chromatography (HPLC) method has been used to separate
and quantify carotenoids and, hence, the values given in Table S1
are experiments done using HPLC.
Conclusion
Increasing demand for traditional, natural, and fiber-rich food
has stimulated a renewed interest in this ancient cereal. Although
common wheat (Triticum aestivum) is the major species grown in the
world, interest has grown in the recent years in dicoccum wheat
due to its high nutritive value, lower starch digestibility, higher
content of antioxidant compounds, and high DF content which

2248 Journal of Food Science r Vol. 82, Nr. 10, 2017


Health benefits of dicoccum wheat . . .
have resulted in various health benefits. Therefore, foods prepared
from dicoccum wheat can be considered as hypoglycaemic. Also,
the studies carried out on nutritional and clinical studies are very
limited to substantiate their health beneficial effects. Hence, more
nutritional and clinical studies needs to be carried out using animal
or human models with varieties grown in different region of the
world.
Acknowledgment
Authors are thankful to Prof. Ram Rajasekharan, Director,
CSIR-CFTRI for the interest in this study. The authors declare
no conflict of interest statement pertaining to this manuscript.
Author Contributions
Dhanavath Srinu collected much of the information used and
prepared the draft. U.J.S. Prasada Rao also provided some inputs
and finally refined the draft for publication.
References
AACC. 1983. Approved methods of AACC. 46-11A. St. Paul, Minn., USA: American Associ-
ation of Cereal Chemists.
AACC. 2000. Approved methods of AACC. St. Paul, Minn., USA: American Association of
Cereal Chemists.
AACC. 2003. Approved methods of AACC. St. Paul, Minn., USA: American Association of
Cereal Chemists.
Abdel-Aal ESM, Rabalski I. 2008. Bioactive compounds and their antioxidant capacity in selected
primitive and modern wheat species. Open Agric J 2:7–14.
Abdel-Aal ESM, Young JC, Wood PJ, Rabalski I. 2002. Einkorn: a potential candidate for
developing high lutein wheat. Cereal Chem 79:455–7.
Abdel-Aal ESM, Young JC, Rabalski I, Hucl P, Fregeau-Reid J. 2007. Identification and
quantification of seed carotenoids in selected wheat species. J Agric Food Chem 55(3):
787–94.
ADA. 2014. American Diabetes Association. Glycemic Index and Diabetes. Avaiable from:
http://www.diabetes.org/food-and-fitness/food/what-can-i-eat/understanding-carbohydr-
ates/glycemic-index-and-diabetes.html. Accessed 2017 May 27.
Agrawal NS. 1963. Wheat characteristics in relation to utilization. Bull Grain Technol 1:16–23.
Ankita M, Yenagi NB, Kasturiba B. 2010. Designing of low glycaemic chapati of dicoccum
wheat for the effective management of diabetes. Karnataka J Agric Sci 23:476–9.
Annual Report 2012–13. Directorate of Wheat Research, Indian Council of Agricultural Re-
search, Karnal, India.
AOAC. 1990. Official methods of analysis. 13th ed. Washington, DC: Association of Official
Analytical Chemists.
Asp NG, Johansson CG, Halmer H, Siljestorm M. 1983. Rapid enzymatic assay of insoluble
dietary fiber. J Agric Food Chem 31:476–81.
Bhuvaneshwari G, Yenagi NB, Hanchinal RR, Katarki PA. 2001. Physico-chemical character-
istics and milling quality of dicoccum wheat varieties. Karnataka J Agric Sci 14:736–42.
Bhuvaneshwari G, Yenagi NB, Hanchinal RR. 2004. Carbohydrate profile of dicoccum wheat
varieties. Karnataka J Agric Sci 17:781–6.
Bhuvaneshwari G, Nirmala BY, Hanchinal RR. 2005. Pasta making and extrusion qualities of
dicoccum wheat varieties. J Food Sci Technol 42:314–8.
Blanco A, Giorgi, B, Perrino R, Simeone, R. 1990. Risorse genetiche e miglioramento della
qualità del frumento duro. Agric Ric 114:41–58.
Brandolini A, Hidalgo A, Moscaritolo S. 2008. Chemical composition and pasting properties of
einkorn (Triticum monococcum) whole meal flour. J Cereal Sci 47:599–609.
Carpentiera S, Knausab M, Suha M. 2009. Associations between lutein, zeaxanthin and age
related macular degeneration: an overview. Critical Rev Food Sci Nutri 49:313–26.
Chang NW, Huang PC. 1998. Effects of the ratio of polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty
acid to saturated fatty acid on rat plasma and liver lipid concentrations. Lipids 33:481–7.
Chinoy J. 1961. The physiology of drought resistance in wheat II. Evaluation of drought resistance
in eight varieties of wheat on the basis of growth analysis. Phyton 16:131–9.
Cooper R. 2015. Re-discovering ancient wheat varieties as functional foods. J Tradit Comple-
ment Med 5:138–43.
Damania AB, Hakim S, Moualla MY. 1992. Evaluation of variation in Triticum dicoccum for
wheat improvement in stress environment. Hereditas 116:163–6.
D’Antuono LF. 1989. II farro: Areali di coltivazione, caratteristicheagronomiche, utiliz-
zazioneeprospettivecolturali. Inf Agrar 24:49–51.
D’Antuono LF. 1994. Obsolete wheats in Italy: an overview on cultivation, use and perspectives
for their conservation. In: Padulosi S, Ager H, Frison E, editors. Report of the IPGRI
Workshop on Conservation and Use of Underutilized Mediterranean Species. Rome, Italy:
International Plant Genetic Resources Institute. p 41–8.
D’Antuono LF, Minelli M. 1998. Yield and yield components analysis of emmer wheat
(Triticum dicoccum) landraces from Italy. In: Jaradat AA, editor. Proceedings of the 3rd In-
ternational Triticeae Symposium; Aleppo, Syria; May 4–8, 1997. USA: Science Publisher Inc.
p 393–404.
D’Antuono LF, Galletti GC, Bocchini P. 1998. Fiber quality of emmer (Triticum dicoccum) and
einkorn wheat (T. monococcum) landraces as determined by analytical pyrolysis. J Sci Food
Agric 78:213–9.
Darlington D. 1969. The silent millennia in the origin of agriculture. In: Ucko PJ, Dimbleby GW,
editors. The domestication and exploitation of plants and animals. London, UK: Duckworth
Publishers. p 67–72.
DeVries JW, Camire ME, Cho S, Craig S, Gordon D, Jones JM, Li B, Lineback D, Prosky L,
Tungland B. 2001. The definition of dietary fiber. Cereal Foods World 46:112–26.
Hypotheses in Food Science
Concise Reviews &
Dhanavath S, Shaik AB, Prasada Rao UJS. 2016. Bioactive compounds, antioxidant properties
and alpha-glucosidase inhibition of dicoccum wheat and its hull. Int J Sci Environ Technol
5:4296–306.
Dick JW, Matsuo RR. 1988. Durum wheat and pasta products. In: Pomeranz Y, editor. Wheat
chemistry and technology. Vol. 2. St. Paul, Minn., USA: American Association of Cereal
Chemists Inc. p 507–47.
Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 2015. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
and U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2015–2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 8th ed.
Available from: http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/. Accessed 2017 June 6.
EEC. 2000. Commission regulations 824/2000. Procedures for the taking-over of cereals by
intervention agencies and laying own methods of analysis for determining the quality of
cereals. Official J Eur Comm L100/3:31.
Englyst HN, Cumming JH. 1984. Simplified method for the measurement of total non-starch
polysaccharides by GLC of constituent sugars as alditol acetates. Analyst 109:937–42.
Englyst HN, Kingman SM, Cumming JH. 1992. Classification and measurement of nutritionally
important starch fractions. Eur J Clin Nutr 46:33–50.
FAO. 2003. Food energy—methods of analysis and conversion factors. Report of a Technical
Workshop, Rome, 3–6 December 2002, Food and Agriculture Association of the United
Nations, Rome. FAO Food and Nutrition Paper 77. FAO Corporate Document Repository.
FAO. 2015. Crop production and food situation. Available from: http://www.fao.org/3/
a-I4410E.pdf. Accessed 2017 June 6.
FAO. 2017. World food situation. FAO cereal supply and demand brief. Available from:
http://www.fao.org/worldfoodsituation/csdb/en/. Accessed 2017 May 27.
Fares C, Codianni P, Nigro F, Platani C, Scazzina F, Pellegrini N. 2008. Processing and cooking
effects on chemical, nutritional and functional properties of pasta obtained from selected
emmer genotypes. J Sci Food Agric 88:2435–44.
Galterio G, Cappelloni M, Desiderio E, Pogna NE. 1994. Genetic, technological and nutritional
characteristic of three Italian populations of farrum (Triticum turgidum ssp. dicoccum). J Genet
Breed 48:391–7.
Galterio G, Cardarilli D, Codianni P, Acquistucci R. 2001. Evaluation of chemical and techno-
logical characteristics of new lines of Triticum dicoccum. Nahrung/Food 45:263–6.
Galterio G, Codianni P, Giusti B, Pezzarosa B, Cannella C. 2003. Assessment of the agro-
nomical and technological characteristics of Triticum turgidum ssp. dicoccum Shrank and spelta.
Nahrung/Food 47:54–9.
Gebruers K, Dornez E, Boros D, Dynkowska W, Bedo Z, Rakszegi M, Courtin CM. 2008.
Variation in the content of dietary fiber and components thereof in wheats in the health grain
diversity screen. J Agric Food Chem 56:9740–9.
Giacintucci V, Guardeno L, Puig A, Hernando I, Sacchetti G, Pittia P. 2014. Composition,
protein contents, and microstructural characterization of grains and flours of emmer wheats
(Triticum turgidum ssp. dicoccum) of the central Italy type. Czech J Food Sci 32:115–21.
Giambanelli E, Ferioli F, Kocaoglu B, Jorjadze M, Alexieva I, Darbinyan N, D’Antuono LF.
2013. A comparative study of bioactive compounds in primitive wheat populations from Italy,
Turkey, Georgia, Bulgaria and Armenia. J Sci Food Agric 93:3490–501.
Gianfrani C, Auricchio S, Troncone R. 2005. Adaptive and innate immune responses in celiac
disease. Immunol Lett 99:141–5.
Grausgruber H, Scheiblauer J, Schonlechner R, Ruckenbauer P, Berghofer E. 2004. Variability
in chemical composition and biologically active constituents of cereals. In: Vollmann J, Graus-
gruber H, Ruckenbauer P, editors. Genetic variation for plant breeding. Proceedings of the
17th EUCARPIA General Congress, Tulln, Austria, 8–11 September, 2004. Austria: BOKU
(University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences). p 23–6.
Grewal S, Goel S. 2015. Current research status and future challenges to wheat production in
India. Indian J Biotechnol 14:445–54.
Hammed AM, Simsek S. 2014. Hulled wheat: a review of nutritional properties and processing
methods. Cereal Chem 91:97–104.
Harris PJ, Smith BG. 2006. Plant cell walls and cell wall polysaccharides: structures, properties
and uses in food products. Int J Food Sci Technol 41:129–43.
Hawk BP, Oser BL, Summerson HW. 1965. Practical physiological chemistry. New York, USA:
McGraw-Hill Book Co. Inc.
Hejcman M, Hejcmanova P. 2015. Yield and nutritive value of grain, glumes and straw of
Triticum dicoccum produced by prehistoric technology in comparison to T. aestivum produced
by modern technology. Interdisciplinaria Archaeological Nat Sci Archaeol 6:31–45.
Hejtmankova K, Lachman J, Hejtmankova A, Pivec V, Janovska D. 2010. Tocols of selected
spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), einkorn wheat (Triticum monococcum L.) and wild emmer
(Triticum dicoccum) varieties. Food Chem 123:1267–74.
Hidalgo A, Brandolini A, Pompei C, Piscozzi R. 2006. Carotenoids and tocols of einkorn wheat
(Triticum monococcum ssp. monococcum L.). J Cereal Sci 44:182–93.
ICC Standard Methods of the International Association for Cereal Science and Technology.
1995. Method 104/1, approved 1960, revised 1990; method 107/1, approved 1968, revised
1995; method 115/1, approved 1972, revised 1992; method 126/1, approved 1972, revised
1992. Verlag Moritz Schafer, Detmold, Germany.
John S, Chellappa AR. 2005. Hypoglycemic effect of Moringa oleifera (drumstick) leaf powder
on human diabetic subjects and albino rats. Indian J Nutr Dietetics 42:22–9.
Kazi BR, Buriro AH, Kubar RA, Jagirani AW. 2007. Weed spectrum frequency and density
in wheat, (Triticum aestivum) under Tando Jam conditions. Pakistan J Weed Sci Res 13(3–4):
241–6.
Koksel H, Cetiner B. 2015. Grain science and industry in Turkey: past, present and future. Cereal
Foods World 60:90–6.
Konvalina P, Capouchova I, Stehno Z, Moudryjr J, Moudry. 2011. Composition of essential
amino acids in emmer wheat landraces and old and modern varieties of bread wheat. J Food
Agric Environ 9:193–7.
Konvalina P, Capouchova I, Stehno Z. 2012a. Agronomically important traits of emmer wheat.
Plant Soil Environ 58:341–6.
Konvalina P, Capouchova I, Stehno Z, Moudry J. 2012b. Differences in yield parameters
of emmer in comparison with and new varieties of bread wheat. African J Agric Res 7:
986–92.
Lachman J, Orsak M, Pivec V, Jiru K. 2012. Antioxidant activity of grain of einkorn (Triticum
monococcum L.), emmer (Triticum dicoccum Schuebl [Schrank]) and spring wheat (Triticum aestivum
L.) varieties. Plant Soil Environ 58:15–21.
Lachman J, Hejtmankova K, Kotikova Z. 2013. Tocols and carotenoids of eincorn, emmer and
spring wheat varieties: selection for breeding and production. Cereal Sci 57:207–14.
Vol. 82, Nr. 10, 2017 r Journal of Food Science 2249
Hypotheses in Food Science
Concise Reviews & Health benefits of dicoccum wheat . . .
Lampi A-M, Nurmi T, Ollilainen V, Piironen V. 2008. Tocopherols and tocotrienols in wheat
genotypes in the health grain diversity screen. J Agric Food Chem 56:9716–21.
Li L, Shewry PR, Ward JL. 2008. Phenolic acids in wheat varieties in the health grain diversity
screen. J Agric Food Chem 56:9732–9.
Loje H, Moller B, Laustsen AM, Hansen A. 2003. Chemical composition, functional properties
and sensory profiling of einkorn (Triticum monococcum L.). J Cereal Sci 37:231–40.
Lu ZX, Walker KZ, Muir JG, O’Dea K. 2004. Arabinoxylan fiber improves metabolic control
in people with Type-II diabetes. Eur J Clin Nutr 58:621–8.
Marino S, Tognetti R, Alvino A. 2009. Crop yield and grain quality of emmer populations
grown in central Italy, as affected by nitrogen fertilization. Eur J Agron 31:233–40.
Mithal SK, Koppar MN. 1990. Evaluation and conservation of wheat genetic resources in India.
In: Srivastava JP, Damania AB, editors. Wheat genetic resources: meeting diverse needs.
Chichester, UK: John Wiley. p 201–9.
Mohan BH, Malleshi NG. 2006. Characteristics of native and enzymatically hydrolyzed common
wheat (Triticum aestivum) and dicoccum wheat (Triticum dicoccum) starches. Eur Food Res
Technol 223:355–61.
Molberg O, McAdam SN, Korner R, Quarsten H, Kristiansen C, Madsen L, Fugger L, Scott H,
Noren O, Roepstorff P, Lundin KE, Sjostrom H, Sollid LM. 1998. Tissue transglutaminase
selectivity modifies gliadin peptides that are recognised by gut-derived T cells in celiac disease.
Nat Med 4:713–7.
Mouliswar P, Kurien S, Daniel VA, Malleshi NG, Venkatarao S. 1993. In-vitro digestibility of
protein and starch as energy food and its bulk reduction. J Food Sci Technol 30:36–9.
Nadaf S. 2010. Studies on biochemical quality parameters of wheat as influenced by location.
Thesis submitted to the in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of
Science (Agriculture). India: University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad.
New Hall Mill. The evolution of wheat. Available from: http://www.newhallmill.
org.uk/wht-evol.htm. Accessed 2017 March 9.
Nielsen C, Hansen D, Husby S, Jacobsen BB, Lillevang ST. 2004. No allelic variation in genes
with high homology in patients with celiac disease and type 1 diabetes. Immunogentics
56:375–8.
Nilsson AC, Ostman EM, Holst J, Bjorch ME. 2007. Including indigestible carbohydrates in
the evening meal of healthy subjects improves glucose tolerance, lowers inflammatory markets
and increases satiety after and subsequent standardized breakfast. J Nutr 138:732–9.
Oak M, Tamhankar S, Rao V, Misra S. 2011. Milling and pasta making potential of cultivated
dicoccum wheat (Triticum turgidum ssp. dicoccum). Cereal Res Comm 39:426–35.
Pagnotta MA, Mondini L, Atallah MF. 2005. Morphological and molecular characterization of
Italian emmer wheat accessions. Euphytica 146:29–37.
Pagnotta MA, Mondini L, Codianni P, Fares C. 2009. Agronomical, quality, and molecular
characterization of twenty Italian emmer wheat (Triticum dicoccum) accessions. Genet Resour
Crop Evol 56:299–310.
Panfili G, Fratianni A, Irano M. 2004. Improved normal-phase high-performance liquid chro-
matography procedure for the determination of carotenoids in cereals. J Agric Food Chem
52:6373–7.
Papa C. 1996. The ‘farre de Montelione’: landrace and representation. In: Padulosi S, Hammer
K, Heller J, editors. Hulled wheats. promoting the conservation and use of underutilized
and neglected crops. 4. Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Hulled Wheats;
21–22 July 1995. Castelvecchio Pascoli, Tuscany, Italy: International Plant Genetic Resources
Institute. p 154–71.
Patil RB, Yenagi NB. 2002. Nutrient composition of semolina of different grades of dicoccum
wheat varieties in comparison with durum and bread wheat. Karnataka J Agric Sci 15:753–5.
Peng J, Sun D, Nevo E. 2011. Wild emmer wheat, Triticum dicoccoides occupies a pivotal position
in wheat domestication process. Aust J Crop Sci 5:1127–43.
Perrino P, Volpe N, Laghetti G. 1996. Lucanica e Forenza: two new varieties of hulled wheat.
Informatore Agrario 52:47:34–5.
Phillips F. 2010. Coeliac disease. Practice Nurse 40:26–9.
Piergiovanni AR, Laghetti G, Perrino P. 1996. Characteristics of meal from hulled wheats
(Triticum dicoccum Schrank and T. spelta L.): an evaluation of selected accessions. Cereal Chem
73:732–5.
Pisante M, Basso B, Carafa AC, Stornaiuolo S. 1996. The possibility of growing spelt (Triticum
dicoccum and T. spelta) in arid regions of southern Italy. Rivista-di Agronomia 30:147–53.
Qureshi AA, Qureshi N, Wright JJ, Shen Z, Kramer G, Gapor A, Chong YH, DeWitt G, Ong
A, Peterson DM. 1991. Lowering of serum cholesterol in hypercholesterolemic humans by
tocotrienols (palmvitee). Am J Clin Nutr 53(4 Suppl):1021S–6S.
Ram BP, Nigam SN. 1981. Puffing and textural characteristics of chapati. I. Relation to varietal
differences in gluten composition. J Food Sci 47:231–3.
Ranga Rao GCP, Leelavathi K, Shurpalekar SR. 1981. Studies on some quality aspects of
semolina from different types of wheat. J Food Sci Technol 18:180–4.
Republica Italiana. 1994. Metodi ufficiali di analisi dei cereali e derivati- suppl. 4. Gazzetta
Ufficiale 186 (10. 8. 1994), S.O.114.
2250 Journal of Food Science r Vol. 82, Nr. 10, 2017
Samuel D. 1996. Archaeology of ancient Egyptian beer. J Am Soc Brew Chem 54:3–12.
Serpen A, Gokmen V, Karagoz A, Koksel H. 2008. Phytochemical quantification and total
antioxidant capacities of emmer (Triticum dicoccum Schrank) and einkorn (Triticum monococcum
L.) wheat landraces. J Agric Food Chem 56:7285–92.
Sherma HC, Waines JG, Foster W. 1981. Variability in primitive and wild wheats for useful
genetic characters. Crop Sci 21:555–9.
Shewry P. 2009. Wheat. J Exp Bot 60:1537–53.
Singh J, Dartois A, Kaur L. 2010. Starch digestibility in food matrix: a review. Trends Food Sci
Technol 21:168–80.
Sollid LM. 2000. Molecular basis of celiac disease. Annu Rev Immunol 18:53–81.
Strehlow W, Hertzka G, Weuffen W. 1994. Aspettinutrizionali. Le caratteristichedietetichedel
farro neltrattamento di malattiecroniche. In: Perrino P, Semeraro D, Laghetti G, editors. II
farro, uncerealedella salute. Bari, Italy: CNR Institutodel Germoplasma. p 52–66.
Suchowilska E, Wiwart M, Boresjszo Z, Packa D, Kandler W, Krska R. 2009. Discriminant
analysis of selected yield components and fatty acid composition of chosen Triticum monococcum,
Triticum dicoccum and Triticum spelta accessions. J Cereal Sci 49:310–5.
Suchowilska E, Wiwart M, Kandler W, Krska R. 2012. A comparison of macro and microele-
ment concentrations in the whole grain of four Triticum species. Plant Soil Environ 58:141–7.
Supekar DT, Patil SR, Munjal SV. 2005. Comparative study of some important aestivum,
durum and dicoccum wheat cultivars for grain, flour quality and suitability for chapatti
making characteristics. J Food Sci Technol 42:488–92.
Szabo AT, Hammer K. 1996. Notes on the taxonomy of farro: T. monococcum, T. dicoccum, T.
spelta. In: Padulosi S, Hammer K, Heller J, editors. Hulled wheat. Rome, Italy: International
Plant Genetic Resources Institute. p 2–40.
Troccoli A, Codianni P. 2005. Appropriate seeding rate for einkorn, emmer, and spelt grown
under rain fed condition in southern Italy. Eur J Agron 22:293–300.
UNI-ISO. 1987. Rice: detrmination of amylose content. Switzerland: N-6647. International
Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
Vincentini O, Maialetti F, Gazza L, Silano M, Dessi M, De Vincenzi M, Pogna NE. 2007. En-
vironmental factors of celiac disease: cytotoxicity of hulled wheat species Triticum monococcum,
T. turgidum ssp. dicoccum and T. aestivum ssp. spelta. J Gastroenter Hepatol 22:1816–22.
Vincentini O, Borrelli O, Silano M, Gazza L, Pogna N, Luchetti R, De Vincenzi M. 2009.
T-cell response to different cultivars of farro wheat, Triticum turgidum ssp. dicoccum, in celiac
disease patients. Clin Nutr 28:272–7.
Wang X, Xu L. 2014. Influence factors on the formation of acrylamide in the amino acid/sugar
chemical model system. J Food Nutr Res 2:344–8.
Ward JL, Poutanen K, Gebruers K, Piironen V, Lampi A-M, Nystrom L, Andersson AAM,
Aman P, Boros D, Rakszegi M, Bedo Z, Shewry PR. 2008. The HEALTHGRAIN cereal
diversity screen: concept, results and prospects. J Agric Food Chem 56:9699–709.
Wood PJ. 2005. Specialty grains and health. In: Abdel-Aal ESM, Wood PJ, editors. Specialty
grains for food and feed. St. Paul, Minn., USA: American Association of Cereal Chemists. p
395–403.
Yenagi NB, Hanchinal RR, Patil CS, Koppikar V, Halagi M. 2001.Glycemic and lipidemic
response to dicoccum wheat (Triticum dicoccum) in the diet of diabetic patients. Int J Diabetes
Dev Countries 21:153–5.
Zaharieva M, Ayana NG, Al Hakimi A, Misra SC, Monneveux P. 2010. Cultivated emmer
wheat (Triticum dicoccon Schrank), an old crop with promising future: a review. Gen Resour
Crop Evol 57:937–62.
Zamakhchari M, Wei G, Dewhirst F, Lee J, Schuppan D, Oppenheim FG, Helmerhorst EJ.
2011. Identification of Rothia bacteria as gluten–degrading natural colonizers of the upper
gastro-intestinal tract. PLoS One 6:e24455.
Žilić S, Dodig D, Basić Z, Vančetović J, Titan P, Đurić N, Tolimir N. 2017. Free asparagine
and sugars profile of cereal species: the potential of cereals for acrylamide formation in foods.
Food Addit Contam Part A Chem Anal Control Expo Risk Assess 34:705–713.
Supporting Information
Additional Supporting Information may be found in the online
version of this article at the publisher’s website:
Table S1. Methods used to analyze various compounds of Triticum
dicoccum.