進口米與國產米品質之研究（二）

Studies on the Quality of Imported and Domestic Rice (II)

洪梅珠(Mei-Chu Hong) ； 洪美珠(Mei-Chu Hung)

《臺中區農業改良場研究彙報》 78期 (2003/03) Pp. 55-64

https://doi.org/10.6956/BTDAIS.200303.0055

摘要

於2002年9月上旬在市面上購買進口米與國產米，並進行品質分析，比較其間之差異，以供消費者買米及各界參考用。結果發現以日本魚沼越光米及新潟越光米最貴（約250元/kg），其價格為國產越光米的3倍，為美國加州越光米及澳洲越光米的4倍，為國產良質米臺稉9號的5倍，美國加州米、澳洲香米及泰國香米的價格，比國產良質米臺稉9號便宜。外觀品質除澳洲香米符合CNS二等白米規格外，其餘均符合CNS一等白米規格。泰國香米及澳洲香米屬長粒細長形米，美國加州米及國產臺中秈10號屬中粒中間形米，其餘均屬短粒粗圓形米。白米溶液pH值以日本魚沼越光米及新潟越光米最低，國產米較高。粗蛋白質含量以彰化縣產越光米、澳洲香米及泰國香米較高，而以國產CAS良質米臺稉9號、池上越光米、日本越光米及澳洲越光米較低。彰化縣產越光米的胺基酸組成中，甲硫胺酸所佔的比率均比池上產越光米、日本新潟越光米、魚沼越光米、美國加州越光米及澳洲越光米高。米飯食味以國產CAS良質米臺稉9號及池上越光米最佳，美國加州米、澳洲米及泰國香米較差。

關鍵字

進口米 ； 國產米 ； 米質

並列摘要

The imported and domestic rice were sampled from supermarket to investigate the variation of rice quality in early September 2002. The information could be referred to consumers in buying high quality milled rice. The results showed that the prices of Niigata Koshihikari and Uonuma Koshihikari were the most expensive, about 250 NT/kg. The price was three, four and five fold to domestic Koshihikari, California & Australia Koshihikari rice and CAS Taikeng 9, respectively. However the prices of California rice, Australia aroma rice and Thailand aroma rice were cheaper than CAS Taikeng 9.The quality of all rice samples reached the CNS first grade of milled rice, except Australia aroma rice which reached the second grade. Thailand aroma rice and Australia aroma rice are long grain type and slender in shape, California rice and domestic rice of Taichung sen 10 are medium grain type and intermediate in shape, other samples belong to short grain type and round in shape. The pH values of Niigata Koshihikari and Uonuma Koshihikari were the lowest among all tested samples. However all domestic rice had higher pH value. The crude protein contents of domestic Koshihikari produced from Changhua County, Australia aroma rice and Thailand aroma rice were higher than domestic rice of CAS Taikeng 9, domestic Koshihikari produced from Taitung County, Niigata Koshihikari, Uonuma Koshihikari, and Australia Koshihikari. The proportion of methioine in Koshihikari produced from Changhua County was higher than Koshihikari produced from Taitung County, Niigata Koshihikari, Uonuma Koshihikari, California Koshihikari and Australia Koshihikari. Domestic CAS Taikeng 9 and Koshihikari produced from Taitung County showed better palatability. However, the California rice, Australia rice, and Thailand aroma rice were the worst in contrast.

並列關鍵字

imported rice ； domestic rice ； rice quality