FE?!» gal/elm 23/ ' Com Meal in the ' Food Supply of Texans flpu‘! I956 TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION R. D. LEWIS, D ||||| 0R. C LLLL GE S TTTT ON.‘ TEXAS DIGEST Several agencies conducted a study 0f the place of corn meal and grits in the diet 0f Texans. Th -f agencies included: the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Texas Agricultural Extension Servi Texas State College for Women, Texas Technological College, University of Texas, North Texas St College, Texas Home Economics Association, Texas Dietetic Association and Texas State Nutrit Council. The cooperators were motivated by their mutual interest in a current nutrition problem —to termine how corn meal and grits will be of the greatest possible dietary benefit to Texans. This bulletin gives information chiefly about corn meal since the place of grits was reported Bulletin 753 of the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. It illustrates voluntary sustained coope tion among educational agencies. ‘ Information has come from many sources= 180 millers, 39 grocers, over 1,600 families and m more individuals, a number of college dormitories, hospitals, school lunchrooms and research in five Y I stitutions of higher education in Texas. Findings: 1. Corn meal is used extensively in Texas. Amounts consumed vary greatly-from 0.4 pound I person per month by families in large cities to 2.6 pounds among rural and small city families. The St average was 1.2 pounds monthly. 2. The chief source of corn meal is the grocery. Grocers’ estimates ranged from one-fifth I much corn meal as flour sold, to equal amounts of the two cereals. Purchases of corn meal are bi chiefly on color; little or no attention is given to removal of germ and bran or to enrichment. S0" but not nearly all of the corn meal available in Texas is enriched. 3. Corn bread is the favorite preparation of corn meal. Proportions of ingredients in Texas c bread vary greatly. Three standardized recipes were required to represent the preference of some ho wives for sour milk, of others for sweet milk and for the use of flour with the meal in some homes. . institutional recipes used sweet milk and flour with the meal. 4. Corn bread of high-eating quality results from the standardized recipes based on the w proportions of ingredients in 85 home recipes except that soda and baking powder were less than |=, dal. Institutional corn bread made by a standardized recipe based on 29 recipes from dormitories, pitals and lunchrooms was good. 5. Enriched corn meal has about four and one-half times as much thiamine as the correspond' non-enriched. In the corn breads made from these meals some with enrichment, others without, the -_ riched had one-third more thiamine. 6. The absolute amount of thiamine in corn bread depends first on the amount in the meal, and milk it contains, then on the amount lost while baking. I 7. The thiamine in the bread as a percentage of that in the batter will be approximately the w A whether the bread is made with enriched or non-enriched meal, with yellow meal or white meal, ~ q or without flour, with sweet milk or with sour milk and the proper proportion of soda, and baked -: loaf 1 inch thick. The corn breads made with meals enriched in the laboratory averaged 86.8 perc as much thiamine as the batter, and 78.9 percent when made with commercial meals. 8. Enriched corn bread eaten in the amount estimated for one person at one meal (4.6 ounc provides 17 to 25 percent of the recommended daily allowances for men and women 25 to 65 years age. » 9. Enriched corn bread contributes indirectly to a good diet through foods with which it is quently eaten—meat, buttermilk and such vegetables as red beans, green onions, blackeye peas,t . nips and greens and cabbage. Some of these accompanying foods supply vitamins other than the group, others supply amino acids which are low in corn meal. c 10. The greater food value of enriched corn meal over non-enriched is demonstrated by the {h _ er thiamine content in the self-selected diet of college women when the corn bread was made with riched meal, and by the better growth of rats when their rations contained the enriched meal. 11. The greatest benefit from corn meal can be derived only if in sour milk bread the proper v portion of soda is used (1/2 teaspoon to 1% cups of milk) and if the corn meal used is enriched. p _ best way to assure Texans of enriched corn meal is by a legal requirement as is done for wheat fl bread and oleomargarine. ‘ 12. The educational campaign in progress should be continued toward the goal of the greatest I tritional benefit from corn meal. ' Steps (by counties) of the number of Texas “which grind corn for human consump- {and millers’ estimates of number of bush- 1 corn ground annually. Elation of information on extent to which eal is eaten by Texans and sources and f of meal. y as to the Ways in which Texans pre-- iland eat corn meal and grits. ijtion of recipes for corn bread: omemade, from Texas homes widely _, scattered over the State. stitutional, from Texas college dormi- tories, hospitals, and lunch rooms. Tysis of proportion of ingredients in corn Y recipes collected, in effort to identify p s corn bread.” . flopment of standard recipes for labor- _. use. efore the analysis of collected recipes Qas available. sed on proportions in collected home ecipes. Jased on proportions in collected insti- -_ utional recipes. ling of quality of corn bread made by dardized recipes. omemade ilnstitutional corn bread CONSECUTIVE STEPS IN THE COOPERATIVE UNDERTAKING Participants Texas Agricultural Extension Service. Research Committee-l of the Texas State Nutri- tion Council, with the assistance of the Commu- nity Nutrition Section of the Texas Dietetic Asso- ciation. Community Nutrition Section of the Texas Die- tetic Association, through special committees. Research Committee of the Texas State Nutri- tion Council, with the assistance of the home eco- nomics students in their respective institutions. Graduate students of Texas State College for Women. Department of Rural Home Research, Texas Ag- ricultural Experiment Station, as part of the Work in Research and Marketing project 603, and grad- uate students at Texas State College for Women. Texas Technological College. Department of Rural Home Research and grad- uate studentsat Texas State College for Women. Graduate students at Texas State College for Women. Persons trained in foods and cookery at Texas Technological College; staff members of the De- partment of Rural Home Research, food special- ists of the Texas Agricultural Extension Service, local home economics homemakers; foods classes of North TexaseState College and the University of Texas; and Texas homemakers reached through county home demonstration agents. Students in college dining halls at Texas State College for Women. (Continued on page 4) i of one nutritionist each in the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, North Texas State College, Texas Tech- t. College, Texas State College for Women and University of Texas. " 3 8. CONSECUTIVE STEPS IN THE COOPERATIVE UNDERTAKING — (Continued) Steps Experiments conducted On retention of thiamine, riboflavin and niacin 1n corn meal and grits preparations. On rat growth as affected by enriched versus non-enriched corn meal. On thiamine content of self-selected diets of college women as affected by enriched versus non-enriched corn bread. Educational campaign, in progress, With ob- jective of making all Texans want enriched corn meal and grits, of inducing millers and merchants to provide Texas consumers with these enriched products, and interesting mem- bers of the Texas Legislature in the legal re- quirement of corn meal and grits enrichment. CONTENTS Digest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Consecutive Steps in the Cooperative Undertaking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Introduction. . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Scope oi Inquiries. . .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Findings in the Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Amount oi Com Meal Used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Source and Kind oi Corn Meal and Grits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6 Ways oi Preparing Corn Meal and Grits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Collection oi Corn Bread Recipes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Laboratory Studies on Corn Meal and Corn Bread . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Standardizing Corn Bread Recipes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Quality oi Corn Breads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Iudging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Practical Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 Chemical Determination oi Thiamine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 Materials Used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 Sampling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 Method oi Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Results and Discussion oi Chemical Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Thiamine Content oi Meals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Thiamine Content oi Corn Breads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..l2 Thiamine Retention in Corn Breads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 Dietary Contribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . .— . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Corn Meal in the Diet oi Texas College Women . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 Bioassay oi Thiamine in Corn Bread . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .‘ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 Reierences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 Participants Under direction of the five members of the v search Committee of the Texas State Nutriti Council, each working in her institution’s labo , tories. Texas Technological College and the Universi; of Texas, thiamine in corn bread; Department“ Rural Home Research, all vitamins and all p parations included in the experiments. " Graduate students in the Nutrition Departmé: at Texas State College for Women. * Graduate students and students in home mana ment houses at North Texas State College. ‘t Texas Agricultural Extension Service, Texas I tetic Association, Texas Home Economics w; ciation, Texas State Nutrition Council, Texas ‘ a ricultural Experiment Station, and college dep _ ments which have had a part in the cooperati, undertaking. L \ ANS BECAME MORE HEALTH AND NUTRI- i scious during the second World War than fore. A national nutrition program in- l. flour and bread enrichment came to a n time of stress, War Food Order No. 1 "g" white bread enrichment accomplished ht what had been set as a long-time goal. ?~ A1943) was one of the first states to pass king permanent the enrichment of flour "te bread. ‘en more than 20 states had such a law 5 states required the enrichment of de- l corn meal and grits, Texas nutritionists titians thought it time to consider wheth- Hhment of these cereals might be a prob- F-Texas. The question called for informa- the importance of corn meal and grits in 0f Texans, their source, the quantity used, a ors affecting quantity, the Ways in which e prepared for eating and the effect of on the nutrients they contain. i_ e professional agencies especially inter- y. raising the nutritional status of Texans _ ed a plan in 1946 to get such information his publication is a report of that cooper- I dertaking. ieagencies which participated in the con- (“e steps taken to obtain data of various iand to make practical application of the are shown on pages 3 and 4. SURVEYS Scope of Inquiries me of the desired information on the use “a meal and grits by Texans was available ‘ietary studies which had been conducted ader purposes (10, 29). A number of sur- l, 2, 4, 14, 16, 20, 23,30, 31, 32, 34) also nducted to meet the specific needs of this tive undertaking. In every investigation, rt was made to have those giving informa- prise a representative sample of the pop- g group being studied. Methods used to ob- ’ ormation included questionnaires, personal ljtively, professor, Department of Rural Home Re- Texas Agricultural Experiment Station; head, , ent of Food and Nutrition, Texas Technological _- formerly associate professor, Department of Economics, Texas State College for Women; dean, of Home Economics, North Texas State College; ' erly professor, Department of Home Economics, i= sity of Texas. tom Meal in the Food Supply of T exam * JESSIE WHITACRE, MINA W. LAMB, LA.URA MCLAUGHLIN, FLORENCE I. SCOULAR and JET C. WINTERS* interviews and current records kept by house- wives. Where special committees functioned, each member obtained the desired information in her locality; the whole committee report represented different regions of the State. Such was the case with visits to 39 stores in five localities (32), in- quiries on ways of preparing corn meal and grits (31) and with the collection of recipes (30). Each county having a home demonstration agent was included in the survey of mills (24). The agent personally obtained and reported the information for her county. All students then in college dormitories and in home management houses (6, 22) at North Tex- as State College, (NTSC) were included in the study. Written records of the desired informa- tion were kept. The 63 families in the dietary study in Lub- bock (10) were selected at random from different sections of town to represent all economic and so- cial groups. The inventory method was used to determine a week’s food consumption by these families. The study of the food supply of 389 rural families (29) covered three tenure groups—own- ers or operators, renters (including croppers) and wage laborers-of both the white and the Negro population. Random selection of families was made in five counties representing three regions of the State. ‘The Farm Security Administration and the Texas Agricultural Extension Service as- sisted with the selection in all regions. The Ag- ricultural Adjustment Administration (now the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Of- fice) also assisted in Brazos County. Information was obtained from these families through per- sonal interview and a questionnaire was filled out at the time by the investigator. The several surveys made by the Texas State College for Women (TSCW) (1, 2, 4, 14, 16, 20, 23, 34) emphasized statewide coverage and par- ticipation by native Texans, chiefly third gener- ation. Two groups of Texans furnished data about food habits: 875 students at TSCW rep- resenting their families and 228 housewives with whom the investigators had some previous pro- fessional or friendly relation. The 657 native Texans ingthe first dormitory group of students were voluntary subjects. The 218 students who took part in other surveys were home economics majors. The groups of housewives contacted di- rectly were representative of the Texas popula- tion (1950 census) (26) in the division between 5 urban and rural families. The one group for which information on income was obtained (102 families in Collin county) was somewhat over- weighted with moderate income people, 48 per- cent in comparison with 35 percent for the State. It seems likely this also is true among families of students attending a State college. However, this overweighting in the moderate income class prob- ably does not affect the reliability of the conclu- sions concerning the use of corn meal and grits by Texas families. The wide geographic distribution of the sur- veys is shown in the outline map of Texas (Fig- ure 1) (7). The Roman numerals indicate the six geographic regions in which the 875 TSCW students lived, distribution by percentages of the total group being 23, 20, 29 and 17, respectively, for regions I, II, III and IV, and 8 and 3 percent for regions V and VI. Additional symbols give the approximate location of the counties or cities in which other surveys were made. Findings in the Surveys Amount of Corn Meal Used Twenty-nine of the 39 grocers were asked to compare the amount of corn meal sold with wheat flour. Their estimates varied from one-fifth as much corn meal as flour to equal amounts of the two cereals. a The 63 families in Lubbock (population 40,- 000 in 1943) consumed approximately 20 percent as much corn meal as wheat flour. Ten to 20 percent as much corn meal as flour was used over 1_,n,m,nz:,'! AND 1: ‘rscw sruosurs‘ FAMILIES. L-J LUBBOCK CITY FAMILIES- 96 HOUSEWIVES m EL PASO, cotuu, BENTON, AND sum: couunss . A RURAL FAMILIES m BRAZOS, NACOGDOOHES, RUSK, LUBBOCK AND LAMB COUNTIES . C enoceav stones m LUBBOCK,DENTON, AUSTIN, BRYAN-COLLEGE STATION AND FALFURRIAS. Figure 1. Geographic distribution of the surveys. Map derived from map in Chambers, “The Geography of Texas," 1946 (7). 6 the same period of time in three dormitories it NTSC. Among the-389 rural families, the ratio J corn meal to flour was 1:1.5 for white and 1: for Negro. The average amount of meal was . pounds per person per week. The rural families in the group represent by 140 students at TSCW (23) estimated t their corn meal consumption averaged 1.6 poun per person per month. The records kept by the 1 rural families in Collin county (14) showed . average 2.6 pounds per person per month. AmoI these two groups of families, those in small cit’ averaged 1.3 and 1.8 pounds per person per mon respectively. The average corn meal consu I tion for families in large cities was only If pound per person per month. Based on a mont record of consumption of corn meal, flour a commercial bread by families in Collin coun the ratio of meal to flour was 1 :2.3 for rural l income families (less than $2,000 per year) a 1 :5.0 for urban high income families. Source and Kind oi Corn Meal and Grits Reports from 182 counties showed m' grinding corn for human consumption in 71 ‘fl the counties (24). Bushels of corn ground ann ally (1946) ranged from 10 to 1,126,000; 43 mi exceeded 1,000 bushels and 13 ground 10,000 b shels or more. Very little of the ground co went directly into Texas homes. i Nearly all of the 389 white and Negro ru ' families (29) bought their corn meal at the 1 ' cery in packages of less than 25 pounds. Pac, age sizes in 19 of the stores visited (Austin, B- an-College ‘Station and Falfurrias) were: 1%, 11/2, 2, 5, 10 and 25 pounds; grits, chie i 11/2 pound packages, although 1 store also carri the 3-pound size. The 5-pound package of m, was found most frequently, but the 10 and pound packages also were common. The groce- was the main source of meal among Collin coun families (114, 34)-92 percent for rural, 95 pep’ cent for towns and 100 percent for small citi The 5-pound packages were bought by about h, of the rural group and small town families, b the most populous localities preferred the pound size. About one-fourth of the rural fa i ilies bought the 10-pound size, while small-to,’ families bought three to four times as many p pound as 10-pound packages. e Committee members visiting 39 stores ' Lubbock. Denton, Austin, Bryan-College Stati and Falfurrias found 25 brands of corn meal a, the shelves. Seventeen of these brands were fro Texas mills. The three brands of grits fou , came from out of state. Most of the meal w‘ degermed “cream meal,” but some stores handl a Texas brand of rock ground whole meal. The volume of white meal on the shelves f considerably greater than that of yellow meal the 39 stores. The families of 657 native Tex i;pat TSCW indicated that the color of meal Fchief basis of choice; white or yellow was ‘according to family preference. Among ewives (2), 143 rural and 85 urban, 2.3 i many used white as yellow meal; in the Q distribution of families of students, 2.2 _ many used yellow as white meal. Use ~ meal (2, 4, 16, 34) increased from east pvei‘ the State. Ratios of yellow to white i1 (Figure 1) were 2.0:1 (I and II), 2.6:1 a :1 (V) and 7.6:1 (VI). White grits were j monly used than yellow. “I139 stores (32) there were 68 brands of meal and 92 of non-enriched; of grits, 38 “.3 and 6 non-enriched. Grocers said that stomers seemed unconcerned about en- p‘ of corn meal and grits. Among the 389 Yd Negro rural families in three regions tate (29) two-thirds did not know wheth- bought degermed or whole meal and half know Whether the meal was enriched. 1 Preparing Corn Meal and Grits ormation was obtained from homes, school ms, cafeterias, cafes, restaurants, hos- ~ d dormitories (31), on ways of preparing l and grits. Fourteen ways of using corn e mentioned. Corn bread as a loaf, muf- cks and dressing, constituted half of the Lmber of times the different ways were y d. Topping for hard rolls and breading i, liver and okra were common uses. Pone, read, griddle cakes, and mush as cereal, a le 0r fried, and in spoon bread or tamale _'_e other ways reported. All eight ways ed for preparing grits required boiling. mmonly, boiled grits were eaten as cereal, fjrice or potato substitute along with eggs, f cheese. Grits served as an “extender” ple and tamale pie, or when cold were ~ d fried. Y bread was baked as a loaf by half of ilies of 73 students at TSCW and the Col- ty families (14), and was baked as muf- “re often than as sticks by the remainder amilies. A great variety of utensils was baking. Equally common were skillets fourths of them 8 to 10 inches in diame- .= cake pans, (over half with a bottom area h pans were exceedingly variable. The i of untensils in order of preference in- , st iron (40 percent), tinned iron (27 per- luminum (19 percent), steel (10 percent) ‘s (4 percent). Pans seemed to be chosen i'a loaf of desired thickness and crust qual- f‘ every three families preferring thin crust, ' ies preferred thick. Bread according to of cereal used and the frequency of serv- heir homes was listed by 657 students at 2). Wheat bread was first for 92 percent ._omes, corn bread first for 5 percent, sec- f 30 percent and third for nearly 5O per- '84 square inches), but dimensions of rec- o Collection of Corn Bread Recipes Many Texas homemakers contributed their recipes for corn bread on personal request. Most of the first 85 recipes collected (30) were from East, North-central, South-central Texas and the High Plains. The last 26 recipes (16) came from the Trans-Pecos (El Paso) region. Ingredients varied markedly. There was an evident division of preference between sour and sweet milk, and between the use and non-use of sugar and of flour. In general, housewives of Southwest Tex- as used more fat, about half of them more egg,. and they baked thicker loaves for a longer time, than those in other parts of the State. Personal requests for their corn bread recipes were granted by 29 college dormitories, hos- pitals and school lunchrooms (1). Institutional corn bread called for sweet milk only, for sugar, more flour, baking powder and fat, and less egg than the standardized recipes based on those used in 85 homes. LABORATORY STUDIES ON CORN MEAL AND CORN BREAD Enrichment of corn meal and grits materially increases their vitamin content in the raw state. A previous report (25) from one of the partici- pating laboratories noted that enriching corn meal to a level slightly above minimum federal standards increased the thiamine content to 4.7 times, the riboflavin to 3.7 times and the niacin to 4.3 times as much as the corresponding non- enriched meal. Without enrichment, raw grits were practically devoid of thiamine. Enriched grits contained 5.0 times as much riboflavin and 7.0 times as much niacin as the non-enriched. After enrichment, raw corn meal and grits have the same vitamin content per unit weight. Since people do not eat raw corn meal and grits, the real benefit of enrichment depends on their vitamin content after cooking. Most of the laboratory work was done on corn bread, because surveys showed it is the favorite corn prepara- tion of Texans. Each of the five participating laboratories conducted such studies with corn bread as best suited their respective situations as to available time, laboratory facilities and qual- ified personnel. Notwithstanding the resulting diversity in the contribution by the different lab- oratories, all work was directed toward the de- termination of the dietary value of the enrich- ment of corn meal. Experiments conducted by one of the labor- atories with grits and meal preparations other than corn bread were included in a previous re- port (25). Standardizing Com Bread Recipes Standardized recipes were essential in the control of laboratory procedure within and among the five institutions, but also the corn bread must be acceptable toTexans. Therefore, Texans were 7 asked how they make corn bread. The first 85 recipes collected from Texas homes provided the basis for a corn bread recipe of family size. The 29 corn bread recipes collected from Texas college dormitories, hospitals and school lunchrooms were the basis for a quantity corn bread recipe. The 85 home recipes were analyzed to show the amount of flour used to 1 cup of meal, of soda to 1 cup of sour milk, and the amount each of milk, egg, fat, sugar, salt and baking powder to 1 cup of meal or meal plus flour (30). Such wide variations were found in the proportion of ingred- ients that it was necessary to standardize three recipes, two made with sour milk, one of which contained flour, and one made with sweet milk and no flour. The standardized recipes use the modal proportions of ingredients, except that leavening is below modal. All institutional recipes satisfied the require- ment by definition that corn bread must contain more corn meal than flour. The standardized in- stitutional-size recipe was developed from the 15 with the proportions of ingredients closest to the means of the 29 recipes collected. Before the development of the family-size “Texas corn bread” recipes was completed and before a common supply of meal had been obtain- ed, both Texas Technological College (Texas Tech.) and TSCW were ready for their laboratory TABLE 1. INGREDIENTS IN THE STANDARDIZED CORN BREA work. Each developed a standard corn brea recipe for its own use. Texas Tech., the first l‘ conduct experiments, developed a standard recip for both a sweet milk-baking powder corn brea and a buttermilk-soda corn bread. TSCW use the analysis of the first 9 of the 85 home recipe received as the basis for their standard recipe. 1 The similarity of the standard home-siz recipes is shown in Table 1. All institutions exi cept NTSC contributed to this phase of the study. I For laboratory use, the ingredients were weigh, ed. The dry ingredients were sifted together. The milk was added to the beaten egg, and th'I mixture combined well with the dry ingredients. The fat was melted in the utensil in which th bread was to be baked, thus greasing it, and th surplus fat was stirred gently into the batter, The baking utensil was hot when the batter n». poured into it. The family-size bread was bake in a hot oven, 419° F. (215° C.) at two institu tions and 425° F. (218° C.) and 450° F. (232 C.), respectively, at the other two. Baking tim was 30 minutes in three laboratories and 20 mi a utes in one laboratory. Institutional-size batche were baked at 400° F. (204° C.) for 30 minute; Baking utensils included a 7%-inch square thip tinned-iron layer cake pan, a 7-inch square tinne iron pan 11/4 inches deep and a No. 6 iron skill with an average diameter of 71/2 inches. The ba- ters lost 16 to 17 percent in weight during ba “ mg. D RECIPES FOR THE LABORATORY WORK AT EACH In STITUTION Used bgntihihixtpfiliggfgiystafion Used by Texas Tech. Used by TSCW _ _ Sour milk Sweet milk Sour milk Sweet milk Sour milk Sweet milk - Ingredientsl with flour p Without With Without w-th fl . . . 5 “W” “°‘“‘°’ “w” 1 out our 112$? (ilirihggilcifiglsl Weight of ingredients l. Grams Grams Grams Grams Grams Grams Pounds Corn meal 250 250 250 116 116 140 3 2/3 Flour 56 28 1 1/3 Milk 375 500 375 183 183 248 6.7 Ounces Baking powder 4.5 3.0 4.5 2.8 55 3 1/3 Soda 1.9 1.9 1.7 1.5 Salt 6.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 1 Fat 24.0 24.0 24.0 25.0 25.0 12.0 10 Egg 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 48 0 11 Measure of ingredients‘ Cornmeal 2c 2c 2c 1c 1c 1c 2qt+3c Flour 1/2 c 1/4 c 5c + 5 T Milk 11/2 c 2 c 11/2 c 3/4 c 3/4 c 1 c 3qt + 6 T Baking powder 11/2 t 1 t 11/2 t 5/8 t 1/2 T 9 T Soda 1/2 t 1/2 t 3/8 t 1/4 t Salt 1 t 1 t 1 t 2/3 t 2/3 t 3/4 t 2 1/3 T I Fat 2T 2T 2T 2T 2T IT 1c+7T Egg 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 ' 1 1Sugar, which is optional in all recipes was not used in the laboratory corn bread. 2The Experiment Station. 3The University. 4c means cup: t, teaspoon; T, tablespoon. 8 Good Good Fair Poor Poor l) Golden brown in color 2) Large volume. light 3) Crust slightly rough. small cracks 4) Crust crisp, moist. tender 5) Crumbly crumb 6) Well mixed with no white spots 7) Light. springy .8) Small air spaces 8) Sweet. nutty flavor l0) Well blended It's eatflble 1) Spotted or pasty white 2) Small. compact. heavy 3‘) Smooth surface. large cracks 4) Crust hard. tough 5) Dry or doughy crumb 6) Spotted with flour or baking powder 7) Heavy. not springy 8) Large. coarse. uneven 9) Sour. flat, salty, alkaline l0) Not blended I dislike it . like it Quality of Corn Breads Qquality of corn breads made from the l ed recipes was judged with the aid of _- developed for this purpose. The first Q developed at TSCW and the other at T h., provided for a rating by check marks ,” “fair” or “poor” for each of the speci- cteristics. A description of each char- Characteristics Figure 2. Score card for corn bread. developed and used by TSCW. acteristic for “good” and “poor” was given in these score cards. The descriptions on the two cards Were similar. The TSCW card, Figure 2, was used by 657 Texans among the 1,612 students eating in dorm- itory dining rooms to judge the corn bread made- by the standardized institutional recipe. For five regions of the State, 75 percent of the students’ scores and comments placed the institutional corn Date Score values Description (If your score is not full value. check the description of characteristics which made you cut down the score.) Full value Score given Range of scores in each class shown in ( ). Write specific value given. Do not check class value. of corn meal Total score 100 ~ ' -- ent Station. s Poor Good Good Fair Poor mooth Pleasantly rough (8-10) (5-7) (1-4) Xgrgerzrggkgop Fine hairline cracks In Too dark Golden brown (4-5) (3) (1-2) Pasty white Uniform 5 Off color Characteristic of Spotty ingredients Too coarse (4-5) (3') (l-Z) 'l'oo compact _ Too fine Typically coarse 5 Irregular Granular crumb (12-15) (8-11) (l-7) Doughy Crunchy crust 15 Too dry Slightly moist 5 (45) (3) (L2) Soqqv Tough (8-10) (5-7) (1-4) Hard Tender 10 Too crumbly Good (40-50) (26-39) (1-25) Off flavor Characteristic 50 1o 3. Score card for corn bread developed by Texas Tech. and revised ‘by home economists at that college and at 9 bread in the good to excellent class. Only 57 per- cent of those from the El Paso region rated the corn bread that high. Probably the corn bread made with White meal for seving in the dormitor- ies was less acceptable to many 0f the students from the El Paso region because they were ac- customed t0 corn bread made with yellow meal. The Texas Tech. score card was revised, Fig- ure 3, jointly by home economists at that college and the Experiment Station. The main revisions were the introduction of “grain” as a character- istic and the assignment of a range of numerical values to each class of rating. This revised score card was used by the home economists who judg- ed the corn breads made at the Experiment Sta- tion, by the food classes at NTSC and the Uni- versity and by students at TSCW when the stand- ardized family-size recipes were tested. A great majority of the scores were above 80, placing the corn bread in the “good” class. Practical Testing The family-size recipe was tested also in a practical way. The recipes for sour milk corn bread were mimeographed and distributed by the Texas Agricultural Extension Service to home demonstration agents and their club women. Every one who tried these recipes was requested to use the exact proportion of ingredients given and to follow carefully the directions for mixing and baking. No report was required, but com- ments were invited from all users of the recipes. Shortly after distribution, more than 70 volun- tary responses had come in. These reports indi- cated that both corn breads—one with flour, the other Without—Were well liked, with nearly five times as many preferring the corn bread with flour. Two women said they liked more leaven- ing; several wanted more salt and four preferred a baking temperature above 400° F. Many wo- men mentioned improvement in their corn bread through the use of these recipes. The following comments are typical: “It is a good recipe and I am going to keep on using it.” “I find your corn bread recipe very good and I like the way it’s mixed, especially the egg and milk.” “I haven’t made good corn bread since I mar- ried, but this recipe (without flour) is very good.” “Comment from my husband was, ‘Why haven’t you been making bread like this all the time?’.” A “Without knowing I was using a different recipe, my husband commented at supper, ‘This is the best corn bread you have ever made’.” These comments indicate that Texas home- makers are realizing that high-quality corn bread can be made with a third to a half as much leaven- ing as many of them are accustomed to use. l0 Chemical Determination of Thiamine Three of the laboratories—Texas Tech., th University and the Experiment Station—parti , pated in the comparison through chemical dete minations of the thiamine value of enriched an non-enriched corn meal and corn bread. I Materials Used Except for the meal, each laboratory Lo tained all ingredients as needed at local groce ies. Whole pasturized sweet milk and cultur buttermilk were used. Texas Tech. used two commercial brands g corn meal, Everlite and Aunt Jemima, both as a, enriched and a non-enriched product, from t 5 local markets. The meals for the other two If stitutions were obtained from two milling esta, lishments in Texas, as non-enriched product partially or completely degermed. v meal was supplied in 100-pound bags, the yello in 50-pound bags. } Half of each lot of meal was enriched at t University or the Experiment Station, with .- specially prepared mixture obtained first fro the South Carolina Agricultural Experiment S :6, tion, later from Merck and Company. Both m’: tures are called premix in this report. The =1 mix to enrich each batch of meal was used in 13f ‘amount expected to bring the content of vitami to the level of federal standards (11). The pr mix was first sifted with a small portion of co meal, then with successively larger amounts r: til, at the Experiment Station some 3 pound and at the University 10 pounds, of the meal been used. This highly enriched meal was adds gradually to the remainder of the meal in an i stitutional-size mixer and stirred for 21/2 to hours. Each batch of enriched meal and the co é responding non-enriched meal was divided amo the laboratories which needed it at the time. Indications that the laboratory procedure f0 enriching was satisfactory are: the good agr ment between thiamine in the enriched m, found by analysis and the expected values ca, culated from the label information (3.04 vers 3.05 micrograms per gram, the University) ; co - parable recoveries of the pure crystalline thi mine analyzed as a sample, and of the thiami § found in food samples supplemented with t" pure vitamin (average 99.8 percent, range '2 106, and average 97.2 percent, range 98-112, spectively, Experiment Station); and vitam' value of the enriched meal (Merck premix) Willi . in the range of federal standards. Sampling At Texas Tech. each package of the comme cial meals was well mixed before sampling f_ analysis and using to make corn bread. ‘ At the University, to get a sample of the e riched corn meal for analysis, approximately “g grams were placed on a large sheet of wax pa The Whi rolled, that is a corner of the sheet was pull- ver the top of the material as far as possible spillage; this was repeated with each of other three corners and the entire process re- d six times. The pile of material was then ned and divided into quarters with a spat- *1 Two opposite quarterswere discarded and " rolling repeated. This process of rolling and Q ering was repeated two more times and a f am sample was Weighed carefully for analy- The Experiment Station employed a quarter- , technique similar to the University’s, using lwn Wrapping paper and an amount of meal i ~ grams) sufficient to provide corn meal sam- and a batch 0f corn bread. The 5-gram If» of meal were each placed in a 100-mil1i- volumetric flask into which 25 milliliters of A actant previously had been pipetted. g In all laboratories, the samples of batter were immediately after mixing; the remainder the batter was placed in the preheated oven as In as possible. At the University, 10-gram ‘ples of batter were carefully weighed on the lytical balance and transferred quickly to the j action flask. The batter samples at the Ex- f ' ent Station were weighed on the trip bal- e into a shallow drying dish and covered im- _iate1y. Each covered sample was then weigh- precisely on the analytical balance and trans- ed through a funnel to a 100-milliliter volu- lntric flask for extraction. The corn bread was cooled to room temper- re (about 11/2 hours) before sampling. The , was quartered; each quarter cut into three ges; and the center wedge of each quarter ; used for the samples. f At the University, the corn bread wedges ., e crumbled thoroughly by hand, particular at- ition being given to breaking the crust and dis- Vuting it well through the crumb. The Exper- int Station used first a Moule rotary grater crumble each wedge, then passed the crumbled through a wire sieve. The finely divided 7| bread from the four wedges was mixed thor- hly, first with a spoon, then by rolling on wax fer, then placed in a drying dish and covered. -gram samples were weighed immediately on ‘- analytical balance and each was transferred l ough a funnel into a 100-milliliter volumetric ‘thod of Analysis p, Each laboratory followed in general the di- l tions of Hennessy (13) for thiochrome assay {cereal products. Texas Tech. used the simpli- e ,tion of the thiochrome method proposed by W. Schiller (21). The Experiment Sta- _n made two modifications in the extraction i edure based on preliminary findings as well lion results reported from other laboratories (3, y; The base exchange purification was omit- , and instead of .1N HZSO, for extraction, 1 percent acetic acid was used first; later when riboflavin and niacin also were determined (25), a sodium acetate buffer solution was used. As digestion enzyme, Texas Tech. used takadiastase; the University, clarase; and the Experiment Sta- tion, a mixture of takadiastase and papain. Results and Discussion of Chemical Studies Thiamine Content of Meals The thiamine values of the several meals used are summarized in Table 2. The increase in thiamine content of the enriched meals over the non-enriched with which each is to be compared, ranges from a third to over five times the con- tent of the non-enriched. The first three pre- mixes used for meal enrichment were lower in thiamine content than the fourth premix; the differences are reflected in the enriched meals. The variation in content of non-enriched meals is illustrated by their range of values—1.00 to 1.98 mcg'/ g for the meals used at the University and Experiment Station, and .94 and 2.92 mcg/g for the two commercial brands used by Texas Tech. Non-enriched values depend on the natural thia- mine content of the corn and the extent to which vitamin-bearing portions of the grain are remov- ed in milling. Hence, the thiamine content of the non-enriched meal makes a variable contribution to the value of the corresponding enriched meal. TABLE 2. THIAMINE CONTENT OF CORN MEALS Mcg/ g wet basisl Kind of Non-enriched Enriched meal No. ‘ No. repli- Range Av. repli- Range Av. cations cations Texas Tech. White Everlite >2 2.92 a 3.59 Auntlemima 2 13% .94 2 4.37 The University? White Premix 1 6 1.00 3.05 The Experiment Station? White Balgifgmlix 1 4 1'73 7 2'53 31:11.2... i iii w Premix a 11 2.60 Biiszmi... a is: a iii Yellow Batchl 2.28 Premix s 12 2.60 2'5” Batch 2 2.93 Premix a 3 3.1a 2'98 1Wet basis means raw batter and baked com bread, i.e. no drying. 2Com meals were enriched by the Experiment Station or the University. ll The source of corn for the two brands of com- mercial meals is not known. Probably enriched and non-enriched meal of each brand were not from the same corn, since the non-enriched Ever- lite had more thiamine than non-enriched Aunt Jemima; but enriched Aunt Jemima exceeded en- riched Everlite in thiamine content. Thiamine Content oi Corn Breads Corn bread made only by standardized reci- pes was used for chemical determination of thia- mine. Texas Tech. used its own recipes, one for sweet milk, the other for sour milk. Both types of bread were made with the enriched and the non-enriched meal of each of two commercial brands. The University and the Experiment Sta- tion each used two of the recipes standardized from the analysis of the 85 home recipes. The University compared enriched breads made with and without flour. The Experiment Station made sour milk bread with non-enriched and with the corresponding enriched meals, and sweet milk bread with enriched meal. The results of determination of thiamine in the corn breads are shown in Table 3 in terms of mcg/g on both the dry and the wet basis, that is for the latter, as eaten. With the exception of TABLE 3. THIAMINE CONTENT OF CORN BREAD sour milk bread with flour, the corn bread the dry basis have a lower thiamine content gram than the raw meals used to make (Tables 2 and 3, Texas Tech. and the Univer even though the milk and eggs contributed t thiamine content. Not only was thiamine l0 baking, but also the dry weight includes othe gredients of the bread. I Still greater differences between the t“ meals and the breads made from them are § for the corn breads on the wet basis (Tabl and 3, Experiment Station). This is becau the greater moisture content of the bread a _ loss in baking. In four of the six compar' that can be made of an enriched bread with non-enriched (wet basis), the enriched has half to three times more thiamine content. ~ Everlite, the difference is small for sweet bread, negligible for sour milk. This reflectsé smaller increase in thiamine due to enrich of Everlite than of Aunt Jemima (Table 2).) Thiamine Retention in Corn Breads Thiamine retention was determined by j paring the contents of the batter and the g ant bread. Calculations on the dry basis with»; ’»“ Mcg/g dry basisl Mcg/g wet basis a Kind oi Non-enriched Enriched Non-enriched Enriched h ‘m ‘izazsif- M- 12522‘: Range ~- Rmge Av» KW A Texas Tech. Sour milk 5 l 35 2 24 2 19 . 1.3 . . - Everlite 3 L44 1.40 2 L51 1.43 229 2.26 2.53 . .55 1.76 .96 2.62 Aunt Iemima 2 .62 .58 2 L82 1.79 L04 1.00 236 Sweet milk 2 1 56 1 98 2 4o . 1. 8 - - v - Everlite 4 1.58 1.40 2 L58 1.57 236 2.13 2A5 . .65 1.70 1.04 2.87 Aunt Iemima 3 :75 .68 2 1.91 1.80 L19 1.10 31m The University Made without flour o at“ 1.47 ' 2-53 Made with flour No data 3 1.70 No data The Experiment Station Sour milk White meal B“1§f:n11ix 1 s '3; .94 4 1.22 No data “Ififgnfix 2 s l-gg .91 s 1.12 No am Yellow meal 33 Premix 3 No data 4 L29 1.06 No data Sweet milk wh“1§’re‘§§:13 No data 4 1.1a No data Premix 4 No data 5 1.91 No data lDry basis values were calculated trom corresponding wet basis values and moisture content. 12 ialues were made by Texas Tech. and the ity, using the following equations: i‘ weight loss ff% moisture = i-i-i- X 199 " sample weight f. mcg/ g wet basis ' to dry basis: i-i- I mcg/g dry basis _ 1.00 — ‘Y, moisture 1.00 . mcg/g batter —— mcg/g bread y = X 100 mcg/g batter Retention = 100% — ‘X, loss e Experiment Station made calculations ,wet basis using total batch values. Equa- BT01 7;." Y-rtotal grams X its mcg/ g thiamine = total mcg i. in batch of batter. total grams X its mcg/g thiamine z total mcg A in resultant bread. ‘I Total mcg in bread ._ X 100 = ‘Z, retention Total mcg in batter ath methods are predicated on the as- ons that all of the thiamine is in the dry _ of both batter and bread, and that the .3 while baking that can be determined by i, is moisture. The results by the two J of calculations used are comparable. The Ywill be identical if the equivalence between f: of batter and 1 gram of resultant bread i‘ ined and used in the calculation on the is. i 4 contrast to the variation in thiamine con- ‘ithin the non-enriched and the enriched 1 of corn breads shown in Table 3, is the g similarity in the percentage retentions = in Table 4. The breads made in two lab- 'es with laboratory-enriched meals showed ons ranging from 84.0 to 90.3 percent, and Yng 86.8 percent. The thiamine in the as a percentage of that in the batter was 'mately the same whether the bread was fwith enriched or non-enriched meal, yellow g white meal, sour milk or sweet milk, with Shout flour, or the meal was enriched with int premixes. ‘ e retentions of thiamine by breads made he commercial meals also are similar. In- '1 one somewhat variant value (66.4 per- T the average of eight retentions, (highest ch is 78.4 percent), is 73.7 percent. No im- t difference was found between retentions n-enriched and enriched bread, (average rsus 74.7 percent), nor between the brands (Everlite average 74.0 percent, Aunt : 73.4 percent), However, the retentions by i, sweet milk corn breads are consistently y greater (average 77.6 percent) than the ilk breads (average 69.9 percent). , explanation for the contrast in the reten- f thiamine in sweet milk versus sour milk breads reported by Texas Tech. and the Experi- ment Station is shown in Table 5. The data for the Experiment Station are taken from a separ- ate investigation on the relation of pH to reten- tion of B vitamins in corn bread (18). The lower pH values of batter and bread are associated with the higher retentions. This is true both within and among laboratories. Different breads were used by Texas Tech. for the determination of pH values and of retention, but the same recipe was used for both purposes. The pH values and re- tention were determined on the same bread and its batter in each baking at the Experiment Sta- tion. Data from both laboratories indicate that if the baking powder is sufficiently balanced, the pH of the bread i_s little, if any, higher than of the preceding batter. But with soda, the 3.4 grams to 11/2 cups of sour milk used by Texas Tech., resulted in a pH of 6.9 for batter and 7.3 for bread; whereas the 1.9 grams of soda to 1% cups of sour milk used by the Experiment Sta- tion gave a pH of 5.8 for batter and of 6.0 to 6.2 for bread. Increasing the amount of soda, from 1.9 to 6.0 grams in the standardized sour milk recipe for TABLE 4. RETENTION OF THIAMINE IN CORN BREAD Non-enriched Enriched I Kind oi No. Retentionl. '2, No. Retention, Y, b d l'- l'- com m“ cfiiaoils Range Av. cgeéaoils Range Av. A Texas Tech. Sour milk ‘ l Everlite 9 12.1 2 10.2 Aunt Iemima 2 99.4 2 $3? 10.9 Sweet milk Everlite 4 gg-g 14.1 2 Zg-g 19.9 Aunt Iemima ~ 9 19.4 2 19.1 The University Sour milk Made without 87.2 flour 3 89.0 87'! Made with 85.0 flour 3 95.9 85-5 The ‘Experiment Station Sour milk White meal Batch 1 87.2 87.4 premix 1 3 99.5 87-5 4 90.5 88-6 Batch Z 85.4 88.5 premix 2 3 91.2 86-2 3 92.2 “'3 Yellow meal 83.0 Premix 3 4 89.2 86's Sweet milk White meal Premix 9 4 94.0 premix 4 5 ggjg » 95.1 lCalculated on the dry basis with per gram values by Texas Tech. and the University; on the wet basis with totalibatch values by the Experiment Station. l3 »»»» -. Figure 4. This size loaf. 71/2 inches diameter and 1 inch thick. provides 130 grams (4.6 ounces) ot corn bread for each of iour persons at one meal. corn bread (18) produced successively higher pH values of batter and bread, and successively small- er thiamine retentions. With pH of batters 6.0 and below, the pH of corresponding breads did not exceed 6.6 and retentions were good (80 to 89 percent). With pH of batters 6.25 to 6.6, the pH of the resultant breads ranged from 7.2 to 8.9 and retentions fell precipitately to 3 percent or none. While percentage retention is greatest when excessive soda is avoided in making corn bread, the absolute amount of thiamine in the bread will be greater as the amountin the batter is greater. TABLE 5. THIAMINE RETENTION IN CORN BREAD IN RELATION TO pH OF BATTER AND OF BREAD Dietary Contribution Three laboratories, TSCW, the Experi Station and NTSC tested the practical valu enriching corn meal. TSCW and the Experi Station used evaluation of the nutrient con of corn bread and NTSC compared enriched non-enriched corn breads in dietary studies. e The standardized family-size corn bread i made at TSCW was smaller (average weight‘ grams) than the standardized loaf based onp 85 home recipes (average weight 517 gr used at the Experiment Station. But with} smaller loaf considered a typical size for a fa of three for one meal, and the larger loaf for p persons, the average amount consumed per son per meal is counted as 180 grams. p, amount of bread for one person at a meal a timated in this study is shown in Figure 4. f Only corn bread made with Merck enri meal was used for estimating the content of mine in the bread. The thiamine content of; meal was 4.59 mcg/ g. The bread averaged 1f mcg/ g of thiamine. The amount of thia supplied per person at one meal would be 1 1.925 mcg, or 250 mcg (0.250 mg). This am of thiamine as percentages of the 1953 re recommended allowances for adults in the U States (17) follows: MEN WOMEN p Allow- Percentage Allow- Percen Age ance. of allow- Age ance. oi g ‘ mg ance mg anc 2s 1.5 16.6 25 1.1 22. 45 1.3 19.2 45 1.0 25 65 1.2 20.8 65 1.0 25 Enriched corn bread is an important so‘. of thiamine, furnishing at a single meal 17 s1 percent of the recommended daily allowan f this vitamin. The importance is indicated by the following considerations. One of the Grams of leavening Retention. Kind e1 Ne; to 11/2 c milk pH % corn breadl crcetpyr-ls Soda £35133. RcmgeBatter Av. RangeBread Av. Range A‘: Experiment Station? 80611611111111.1161 11 1'9’ ‘1-5 5-81 (4 brgfide) 51613116112111: 9 11 4-5 11-117 (s brgllrlcsis) 311g Sour milk 2 1.9 n 5.6 only 6.6 (1 bread) Texas Tech. Sour milk 9 6.4 o 6.9 7.9 Sweet milk 11 o 4.6 6.9 6.9 181111;? lEnriched meal only in breads at the Experiment Station; both enriched and non-enriched at Texas Tech. 2Data trom separate investigation by the Experiment Station on 14 the relation ot pH to retention of B vitamins 1n corn bread -1O\ keys (14) showed the average annual con- }: of corn meal among 140 families dis- i» over the State was 1.2 pounds per per- umonth; whereas, in one county where re- ere kept by housewives, the average was ids per person per month. The United fiaverage is 1.8 pounds of corn meal per (27.28) and large groups of people in Tex- ed that amount. Such consumption im- iat corn meal with a caloric value of 1.650 pi ein 35 to 41 grams per pound probably to many Texans each month the equiv- dsufficient energy and protein for more ay. A . l,.Texas, corn bread frequently is eaten at aan one meal, especially by rural families. ue of enriched corn bread as a food is cor- lingly multiplied. However, the benefit iamine in sour milk bread depends on not ,o much soda. The milk and eggs in corn crease the content of minerals, especially , , phosphorus and iron, and along with tichment make enriched corn bread two rich in thiamine, one and one-half times l, avin and three times in niacin as the non- i" (25). The milk and eggs also provide ality protein which supplements the very tophane content of corn meal (15). bread eaten frequently contributes in- to the nutritive value of the diet through ids which many Texans think “go with” ead. According to the 102 North Texas in Collin county (34), the five most pre- j food combinations for serving with corn j= re: red beans and green onions, blackeye fd greens, turnips with turnip greens, green y and tomatoes and cabbage with ham hock. issippi (9), both white and Negro families ?corn bread with green leafy vegetables, es- turnip greens, collards and cabbage, and sser extent peas, beans and buttermilk. fjof these accompanying foods contribute (s other than of the B group; others sup- ino acids which are low in corn meal. , eal in the Diet of Texas College Women is study included 22 young college women, each group identified as “North” and ” according to the part they occupied of (me management duplex at NTSC. The ere planned by the two groups of college p. for three 5-day periods. Both groups he same menus for a 5-day period, each purchasing its own food supply. All the ind flour used by both groups was enrich- e corn meals used, both enriched and the nding non-enriched, were furnished by earch Committee of the Texas State Nu- TCouncil. Each day a serving of corn bread i n at one of the meals. One group (South) n-enriched corn meal while the other group ) used the enriched for making corn bread standardized recipe with sour milk, and no flour. The methods of cooking the other foods were not standardized, varying with the exper- ience and techniques of the individual cooks. g A composite sample representing each day’s menus was collected in a weighed jar at the same time that the subjects were served at the table. The sample consisted of a serving of each food from each meal similar in all respects to that eaten by the women. One-fourth glass of milk was col- lected daily in a similar manner, thus giving one homogenous milk sample for each 5-day period. A record was kept of the number of glasses of milk consumed by each subject each day since this was the only variable in the daily food intake. All samples were refrigerated until analyzed. The total daily intake of thiamine was considered to be the sum of the content in the milk and in the composited food samples for the day. The thiamine content of the food was deter- mined by using the Connor and Straub method (8), with modifications from the Association of Vitamin Chemists (5) and Gyorgy (12) in con- verting thiamine to thiochrome. ~" The determined thiamine values of the daily composite food samples including milk, are: SOUTH GROUP Non-enriched corn bread NORTH GROUP Enriched corn bread mg mg 1.06 2.26 1.14 0.90 1.07 1.18 1.07 1.70 1.73 1.00 0.41 0.51 0.82 0.84 0.74 0.65 0.70 1.08 1.00 _ 0.91 0.331 0.691 Average 0.92 1.07 lFor a S-days‘ composite iood supply instead oi daily com- posite. All food samples were analyzed separately except for one 5-day period, as shown in the pre- ceding footnote, when it was not possible to keep the daily composites for separate analysis because of limited refrigerator space. The inclusion of one serving a day of enriched corn bread by the North group did not give consistently higher daily values for this group. However, the average of all such diets was slightly higher, being 1.07 versus 0.92 milligrams of thiamine for the South group with the non-enriched corn bread. Thiamine is destroyed in many cooking pro- cesses. The methods used in the preparation of these diets, with the exception of the corn bread, were not standardized, which was another vari- able. However, these thiamine values suggest that even the slight increase in the daily thiamine content represented by one serving of a food made 15 TABLE 6. SUMMARY OF GRAMS O FED ONLY CORN BREAD MADE OF AND WHOLE GRAIN MEALS BOTH ENRICHED AND NON-ENRICHED F GAINS BY RATS DEGERMED Enriched Non-enriched Sex Degermed who.“ Degermed who.“ gram grain 211 1s? i 18s 114 Males 185 185 135 148 178 175 148 137 Av. 191.3 175.7 156.3 153.0 155 914 114 105 Females 111 129 112 107 109 100 117 100 Av. 125.0 107.7 114.3 104.0 Males + temales 949 850 812 771 Av. 158.2 141.7 135.3 128.5 Grand sum 1799 1583 Grand av.1 149.9 131.9 1F z 7.56. Significant at the 5% level. 1% :: 8.53 5% z 4.49 Sig. F: with an enriched cereal definitely adds to the total daily thiamine intake. Bioassay oi Thiamine in Corn Bread At TSCW, rats which had been depleted of thiamine were the test anim enriched and enriched corn this vitamin. Growth was uation of the results. In the first of three se experiments, the degermed and whole grain corn m a milling firm in Birm- two later studies, either the University or the Experiment Station supplied Both enriched and non-enriched meals were obtained fro ingham, Alabama. For the corn meal. TABLE 7.- SUMMARY O al for comparing non- bread as a source of the criterion for eval- ries of F GRAMS OF GAIN BY RATS FED A BASAL DIET SUPPLEMENTED AT ONE OF THREE LE OF ENRICHED OR NON-ENRICHED CORN BREAD i?! meals were used when corn bread alone consti ted the diet in the experiments with deger i and whole grain meals, also when corn bread Texas meals supplemented a basal diet. But p ' ducts made of enriched meal only were fed fort comparison of baked and unbaked bread. The c0, bread was made by the family-size recipe st dardized at TSCW. The rats were fed corn bread over a 5-wei period in one of three ways—as the entire A l/ibitum; as a supplement to a basal thiamine-f , diet in graduated amounts, (6, 4 and 2 grams daf except Sundays); and as baked versus unbak, corn bread ad libitztm as the entire diet. Six ras, three males and three females, were in each s ment of each series of experiments. . Records were kept of weight at weani weight at depletion, final weight and food c0 sumption. The gains in weight, Le. final weig minus weight at depletion, are shown in Tabl 6 and 7 to compare enriched and non-enrich corn breads. Table 8 contains gains and total f u; consumption in the experiments to compare co bread with batter made by the same recipe. Thel s data were analyzed statistically. Considering degermed and whole grain c0 i bread together (Table 6), the 12 rats on the e riched diet averaged a gain of 149.9 grams, excess of 18.0 grams over the 131.9 grams of t 12 rats on non-enriched corn bread. The diff ence is significant at the 5 percent level. Simil c ly, considering the three levels of corn bread sud plement (Table 7), the superiority of the enrich z, diet is shown by a significant difference of 16? grams in average gain for the 18 rats in ea category, (average 123.2 versus 107.1 grams The greater efficiency of the two higher levy, of corn bread is seen in the downward trend \ " Level oi corn bread supplement g Sex 6 grams 4 grams 2 grams Q Enriched Non-enriched Enriched Non-enriched Enriched Non-enriched: 92 s4 7s 1s s2 I Males 114 96 74 60 52 51 126 103 111 70 38 68 Av. 110.7 87.7 98.3 68.7 55.3 67.0 71 59 89 74 33 34 Females 86 109 70 65 72 58 107 64 96 84 62 68 Av. 88.0 77.3 85.0 74.3 55.7 53.3 Males + iemales 596 495 550 429 333 361 Av. 99.3 82.5 91.7 71.5 55.5 60.2 Enriched + 1091 979 694 non-enriched Av.1 90.9 81.6 57.8 1.F ‘I: 13.07. Significant at the 1% level. Sig. F: 1°/° r: 5.61 5% = 3.40 16 lizéwhich was accelerated with successive re- ns in the supplement. The difference be- the 6 and Z-gram supplements accounts for f5cent of the sum of squares of the levels. gains on degermed enriched corn bread onsistently greater than on the whole grain 6 and 8) ; however, the differences were tistically significant. Neither series of ‘u ents showed a significant difference in nsumption. A possible explanation for the grgain on degermed bread may be the greater iibility associated with its lower fiber con- ;but there are no findings in this study to '1 such an assumption. ye gains on baked bread versus batter (Ta- giwere not significant; yet the average weight er eaten was only 60.4 percent of the y of the baked bread consumed. Similar ion bread and batter are explained partly by jater content of thiamine per gram of bat- per gram of bread. Better utilization of T ooked product also is a possibility. f 11 of the 13 comparisons, the gains of the exceeded those of the females (Tables 6, c8). Differences in the other two instances all, 0.4 and 5.6 grams. ether degermed or whole corn meal was ‘the only food in the diet, or the degermed ,_d as a supplement to a basal diet, the re- the bioassays confirm the superiority of ‘ched over the non-enriched corn breads w- by chemical analyses. pcial thanks are given for the technical nce of: Lucille J. Ward, Kathreen Thomas K. Pace, Department of Rural Home Re- ' Texas Agricultural Experiment Station; llemmons, Department of Food and Nutri- * as Technological College; Lois Anderson, 1- Swanson, Frances Simonds, Olga Saffry, I Jarma, Kitty I. McLaughlin and Eula F. [Department of Home Economics, Texas fillege for Women; and Ada Ruth Rankin, ,of Home Economics, North Texas State authors are grateful to: Bewley Mills, p h, Texas, and the Quaker Oats Company, , Texas, for making available the non- i» degermed cereals; E. J . Lease, South Agricultural Experiment Station, and ipand Company, Inc., Rahway, New Jersey, Council which contributed to some of the f- of the study; Maurine Hearn, State home _tration leader, Texas Agricultural Exten- rvice, and the district and county home tration agents who made the survey of Texas and who distributed corn bread for testing; the home demonstration club p who tested corn bread recipes; college stu- Jnd teachers, extension and research staff llying the premixes; the Texas State Nu- i TABLE 8. SUMMARY OF GRAMS OF GAIN AND FOOD CONSUMPTION BY RATS FED BAKED AND UN- BAKED ENRICHED CORN BREAD S Bdmd Unbaked ex Whole Degermed degermed Gain 167 211 162 Males 185 185 162 175 178 173 Av. 175.7 191.3 165.7 94 155 115 Females 129 lll 132 100 109 131 Av. 107.7 A 125.0 126.0 Males + l temales 850 949 875 Av.1 141.7 158.2 145.8 Food consumption 1072 1060 558 Males 969 9'48 578 1139 833 518 Av. 1060.0 947.0 551.3 72o 951 s35 Females 831 889 655 819 ~ 660 447 Av. 790.0 833.3 545.7 Males + females 5550 5341 3291 Av.2 925.0 890.2 548.5 1 F I 1.72. Not significant. 2 F = 26.30. Significant at the 1% level. ) ) Sig. F: 1% = 6.9a )) s7, = 3.8a ACKNOWLEDGMENTS members and the homemakers who participated in judging corn bread; Gweldolyn Jones, Florence Langford, Lucille Langham, Pearl Taylor, Grace R. Bailey, Charlotte K. Clarke, Nell Morris, Sadie Kate Bass, Rita E. Black, M. K. Foster, Helen Heathe, Helen Nixon, Mattie A. Trickey, Maurine Biggs and Marian Underwood, who as members of special committees in the Texas Dietetic Associa- tion took part in the surveys of the kinds of corn meal and grits available in Texas retail and whole- sale groceries, and of the ways in which Texans prepare corn meal and grits. For assistance in the work at Texas A&M, appreciation is expressed to: J. G. Peniston and Willie Yeager, Subsistence Department, for per- mitting use of an institutional-size mixer to enrich the several batches of corn meal; Ethel T. Grimes, Lillie Bell Bass, Helen M. Forsthoff and Charlene Schram, Department of Rural Home Research, for technical assistance in the labora- tory and for help in analyzing the data and in pre- paring the manuscript; to William H. Smith, Jr., Department of Rural Home Research, for advice on techniques in analytical procedures; Robert L. Smith, Jr., Statistical Laboratory, for assistance in making statistical calculations; and C. B. God- bey, Department of Genetics, for counsel in the interpretation ofthe results of statistical analysis. l7 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18 REFERENCES Anderson, Lois, and A. Greta Swanson. The accepta- bility of an institution baked corn bread. Graduate stilildies, Texas State College for Women, unpublished. 19 7. Anderson, Lois F. Preparation of corn bread in some Texas institutions and the stability of thiamine as an enriching agent in corn meal. Master’s thesis, Texas State College for Women, unpublished. 1947. Andrew, John S., and Robert Nordgren. _ The applica- tion of the thiochrome method to the thiamine analy- sis of cereal and cereal products. Cereal Chem., 18:686-695. 1941. Armstrong, Lillie Mae (with Ercel S. Eppright). Habits of cereal consumption of one hundred Texas families. Master’s thesis, Texas State College for Women, unpublished. 1943. Association of Vitamin Chemists, Inc. Methods of vitamin assay. Interscience Publishers, Inc., N. . 1947. Bass, Sadie Kate. Amount of corn meal used in dorm- itories of North Texas State College. Personal com- munication. 1947. Chambers, William Trout. The geography of Texas. The Steck Company, Austin, Texas. 1946. Connor, R. T., and G. J. Straub. Determination of thiamine by the thiochrome reaction. Ind. Eng. Chem. Anal. Ed., 13:1-8. 1941. Dickins, Dorothy. Some effects of a white corn meal shortage. J. Am. Dietet. Assn., 21:287-288. 1945. Drake, Phyllis. A survey of food practices of 63 families in Lubbock, Texas. Master’s thesis, Library of Texas Technological College. 1943. Federal Security Agency, Food and Drug Adminis- tration. Definitions and standards for food. Service and regulatory announcements, food, drug and cos- metic, No. 2, Rev. 1:22-23. 1949. Gyorgy, P. Vitamin methods. Academic Press, Inc., N. Y. 1950. Hennessy, D. J. A standard thiochrome assay for the determination of thiamine in cereal products. The Cereal Chemists’ Bull., 2 (No. 2): 25-29. 1942. Jarma, Pauline. Some preferred qualities in corn bread: conditions for baking and pans used. Grad- uate studies, Texas State College for Women, un- published. 1949. Krehl, W. A., L. J. Teply, P. S. Sarina, and C. A. Elvehjem. Growth-retarding effect of corn in nico- tinic acid-low rations and its counter-action by tryp- tophane. Science, 101 (No. 2628):489-490. 1945. McLaughlin, Kitty I. Corn bread in the El Paso region. Graduate studies, Texas State College for Women, unpublished. 1949. National Research Council — Food and Nutrition Board. Recommended Dietary Allowances. Pub. 302. 1953. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. Pace, June K., and Jessie Whitacre. Factors = ting retention of B vitamins in corn bread made‘, enriched meal. I. The relation of pH to the ret __ of thiamine, riboflavin, and niacin in corn b Food research, 18 (No. 3): 231-238. 1953. ' Plemmons, Alta E. Retention of vitamin B, iii) breads. Master’s thesis, Library of Texas Techn _ a cal College. 1947. I, Saffry, Olga. New Mexico corn bread. Gr i stulcéies, Texas State College for Women, unpubli“ 9 . . Schiller, George W. Simplification of the thioc method for thiamine determination. Cereal ‘ 21:544-548. 1944. a Scoular, F. I., and A. R. Rankin. The thiamine‘ tent of self-selected diets of college women asr to the enrichment of cereals. The Tex. J. of‘ 5:64-69. 1953. i Simonds, Frances. it’s frequency and quantity. Women, unpublished. 1948. Texas Agricultural Extension Service—Home nomics. Survey of Texas mills which grind c0 Q human consumption. Unpublished report to i State Nutrition Council. Nov., 1946. i Thomas, Kathreen, June K. Pace, and Jessie Whi Effects of enrichment on the thiamine, riboflavie» niacin of corn meal and grits as prepared for Tex. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull., No. 753. 1952. U. S. Census, 1950. Washington, U. S. Govt. g Off. 1951. ' U. S. Dept. Agriculture. Diets of families of earners and clerical workers. Circ. 507. 1939.; j U. S. Dept. Agriculture. Family food consumpti the United States. Misc. Pub. 550. 1944. Whitacre, Jessie. The food supply of Texas families. Tex. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull., No. 642. 1 v Whitacre, Jessie. Texas corn bread. Texas ' Exp. Sta. Popular Article No. 1861, Tex. Dietet. Newsletter. Sept., 1947. .' Whitacre, Jessie. How Texans prepare corn me l‘ ggilts. Unpublished report to Tex. Dietet. Assn. 7. Whitacre, Jessie. Corn meal and grits availab Texas stores. Unpublished report to Tex. l‘ Assn. Nov., 1947. j Whitacre, Jessie. Enrichment of corn meal spo i in Texas. J. Am. Dietet. Assn., 23:500. 1947. _f Willis, Eula F. Corn bread in the diet of one h j rural and urban families in Collin County, Texas evaluation of the importance of corn meal in t .; richment program. Master’s thesis, Texas State 1 lege for Women, unpublished. 1950. j Purchasing corn meal in T Texas State Colle“ [Blank Page in Original Bulletin] State-wide Research x: ‘k The Texas Agricultural Experiment Static is the public agricultural research agency‘- Location oi field research units in Texas main- oi the State of Texas’ and 1s one of nmei Rained by the Texas Agricultural Experiment sfqfiqn 3nd ggoperqfing qgengies pCIIlS Oi i [N THE MAIN STATION, with headquarters at College Station, are 16 subject-matter departments, 2 se . departments, 3 regulatory services and the administrative staff. Located out in the major agricultural of Texas are 21 substations and 9 field laboratories. In addition, there are 14 cooperating stations o} by other agencies, including the Texas Forest Service, the Game and Fish Commission of Texas, T Prison System, the U. S. Department of Agriculture, University of Texas, Texas Technological College ‘ the King Ranch. Some experiments are conducted on farms and ranches and in rural homes. RESEARCH BY THE TEXAS STATION is organized by programs and projects. A program of research re sents a coordinated effort to solve the many problems relating to a common objective or situation. A-i search project represents the procedures for attacking a specific problem within a program. THE TEXAS STATION is conducting about 550 active research projects, grouped in 25 programs which ‘ clude all phases of agriculture in Texas. Among these are: conservation and improvement of soils; servation and use of water in agriculture; grasses and legumes for pastures, ranges, hay, conservation j improvement of soils; grain crops; cotton and other fiber crops; vegetable crops; citrus and other subtt cal fruits, fruits and nuts; oil seed crops——other than cotton; ornamental plants—including turf; brush weeds; insects; plant diseases; beef cattle; dairy cattle; sheep and goats; swine; chickens and turkeys; mal diseases and parasites; fish and game on farms and ranches; farm and ranch engineering; farm l ranch business; marketing agricultural products; rural home economics; and rural agricultural econo Two additional programs are maintenance and upkeep, and central services. RESEARCH RESULTS are carried to Texas farm and ranch owners and homemakers by specialists and c0 l agents of the Texas Agricultural Extension Service.