Talk:Durum wheat/Archive 1

Untitled

North Dakota production figures for 2004 from USDA--Blainster 21:20, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Why does this article mention specifically where in America Durum wheat is made and provides no information for anywhere else in the world's production specifics of Durum wheat? It makes it seem to me like the article is aimed at an American audience. If no-one has any objections (or introduces any other information for other counties) I'm going to remove the sentence "U.S. durum production is primarily in North Dakota, which produced 59% of the US crop in 2004." in a week's time. Treblent 14:25, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence on U.S. production is not accurate.  New Census of Agriculture figures due next month.
--JC Shepard (talk) 17:56, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The 1988 American Dietetics Position Paper contradicts the notion of 'protein combining' in the same meal for a healthy diet as incorrect. I'm removing mention of it from this article. RandomTask 15:09, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Havala, S. and Dwyer, J. (1988). 'Position of the American Dietetic Association: vegetarian diets - technical support paper', J. Am. Diet. Assn., 88, 352-355.

"Intakes of different types of protein that complement one another should be eaten
over the course of the day. However, since endogenous sources of amino acids are
also available, it is not necessary that complementation of amino acid profiles
be precise and at exactly the same meal, as the recently popular
'combined protein theory' suggested."

Triticum turgidum or Triticum durum

This page has the species name as Triticum durum but Chromosome Sorting in Tetraploid Wheat and Its Potential for Genome Analysis by Marie Kubaláková et al Genetics. 2005 June; 170(2): 823–829 link has it as Triticum turgidum Desf. var. durum

[1] suggests that Triticum turgidum var durum and Triticum durum are synonyms.Ttguy (talk) 13:55, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim habitation of medieval Southern Italy.

That sentence makes it sound like they stopped by for a visit and decided to stay for a while. It was a full out conquest and occupation. I'm going to change the sentence to "occupation of Southern Italy". Dr. Morbius (talk) 21:07, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is durum really not rich in gluten?

I read on a lot of websites, including the German wikipedia, that durum is rich in gluten, not poor, as is suggested in this article. Can any specialist check this please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaspervanbuuren (talk • contribs) 12:04, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve also read from several sources that durum wheat has very high gluten content but this is indeed confusing since some sources seem to say it’s not... 188.238.62.174 (talk) 20:00, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On the Dutch Wikipedia, a user pointed to this page as a source for a low amount of gluten in durum. Given the importance of good information for the health of a number of people, I compared the French and de:Hartweizen wiki's and both mentioned the high amount of gluten. I posed a question, and one of the other Wikipedians went looking for an answer. Today, Itsme came up with this source, which clearly states that the amount of gluten is comparable and on average, durum wheat contained significantly higher amounts of tryptophan and wet gluten (...) than bread wheat. Could someone give a contradictory source or change the article? RonnieV (talk) 23:40, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, durum is rich in gluten, it's a serious error to state the contrary. Durum refers to hardness of the grain, the results in less easily available gluten, despite the high content. Thus it also makes doughs less strong, less elastic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plm203 (talk • contribs) 08:14, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

According to this analysis, durum contains 27% wet gluten whereas common wheat has 24%. I added this reference to the article. Overall, the article is poorly referenced with inline citations per WP:CITE, making it difficult to ascertain what is WP:OR vs. reliably sourced content; see WP:SCIRS. --Zefr (talk) 15:15, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is atta made from durum wheat?

Having tried atta flour to make bread (and tasted both types of flour side by side), I do not think so. The article on atta flour is poorly sourced and it is impossible to understand if atta is made from hard wheat or durum (I think they are different species). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.206.207.137 (talk) 00:45, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Health concerns

Wheat allergy source article does not mention Durum at all. Durum is triticum durum or Triticum turgidum, Wheat is Triticum aestivum. Regarding these sensitivities or allergies you have to be more specific 70.83.116.164 (talk) 20:47, 23 January 2017 (UTC) Dag[reply]

The information is present if you read under Wheat pollen and grass allergies. Not sure if there is more evidence you feel is needed. You could always register yourself as a user and edit as needed. --Zefr (talk) 22:04, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Durum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:24, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Durum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130603020656/http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/cgc-ccg/grl-lrg/durum-bledur-eng.htm to http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/cgc-ccg/grl-lrg/durum-bledur-eng.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:46, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]