## 3 Results
The C7 II flour is also characterized by a high level of LaSRC, but this outcome was probably due to the very high content of the bran hydrophilic fraction,  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Flour Stream** & **WaSRC (\%)** & **SuSRC (\%)** & **LaSRC (\%)** & **ScSRC (\%)** & **GPI (-)** \\ \hline B2 & 62.642 \(\pm\) 0.593 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 115.695 \(\pm\) 1.534 \({}^{\mathrm{e}}\)_d.g.h._ & 161.558 \(\pm\) 1.010 \({}^{\mathrm{h}}\) & 79.567 \(\pm\) 0.704 \({}^{\mathrm{d}}\) & 0.827 \(\pm\) 0.007 \({}^{\mathrm{m}}\) \\ B3 & 63.017 \(\pm\) 0.85 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 120.274 \(\pm\) 1.153 \({}^{\mathrm{e}}\)_d.g._ & 180.305 \(\pm\) 1.701 \({}^{\mathrm{s}}\) & 78.150 \(\pm\) 0.692 \({}^{\mathrm{c}}\) & 0.907 \(\pm\) 0.007 \({}^{\mathrm{o}}\) \\ B4 & 71.675 \(\pm\) 0.574 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 119.569 \(\pm\) 0.640 \({}^{\mathrm{h}}\)_d.g._ & 134.052 \(\pm\) 0.501 \({}^{\mathrm{h}}\) & 94.163 \(\pm\) 0.304 \({}^{\mathrm{l}}\) & 0.629 \(\pm\) 0.005 \({}^{\mathrm{s}}\) \\ B5 & 75.508 \(\pm\) 0.302 \({}^{\mathrm{h}}\) & 124.692 \(\pm\) 1370 \({}^{\mathrm{k}}\)_d.g._ & 129.109 \(\pm\) 0.412 \({}^{\mathrm{s}}\) & 97.265 \(\pm\) 0.412 \({}^{\mathrm{k}}\) & 0.582 \(\pm\) 0.003 \({}^{\mathrm{d}}\) \\ \hline C1I & 65.164 \(\pm\) 0.523 \({}^{\mathrm{c}}\)_d.g._ & 114.885 \(\pm\) 0.570 \({}^{\mathrm{d}}\)_d.g._ & 162.432 \(\pm\) 0.114 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\)_d.g._ & 86.106 \(\pm\) 0.198 \({}^{\mathrm{e}}\)_d.g._ & 0.808 \(\pm\) 0.002 \({}^{\mathrm{l}}\) \\ C1 II & 63.932 \(\pm\) 0.228 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\)_d.g._ & 94.796 \(\pm\) 0.747 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 128.096 \(\pm\) 0.228 \({}^{\mathrm{s}}\) & 78.541 \(\pm\) 0.228 \({}^{\mathrm{s}}\)_d.g._ & 0.739 \(\pm\) 0.004 \({}^{\mathrm{i}}\) \\ C2 & 63.009 \(\pm\) 0.302 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 104.997 \(\pm\) 1.951 \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\) & 147.579 \(\pm\) 0.685 \({}^{\mathrm{k}}\) & 80.345 \(\pm\) 0.198 \({}^{\mathrm{d}}\) & 0.796 \(\pm\) 0.011 \({}^{\mathrm{k}}\) \\ C3 & 64.177 \(\pm\) 0.302 \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\)_c._ & 114.794 \(\pm\) 2.206 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\)_d.g._ & 154.734 \(\pm\) 0.457 \({}^{\mathrm{m}}\) & 84.806 \(\pm\) 0.498 \({}^{\mathrm{e}}\) & 0.775 \(\pm\) 0.008 \({}^{\mathrm{h}}\) \\ C4 & 75.233 \(\pm\) 0.115 \({}^{\mathrm{h}}\) & 121.145 \(\pm\) 0.578 \({}^{\mathrm{h}}\)_d.g._ & 143.074 \(\pm\) 1.033 \({}^{\mathrm{l}}\) & 100.063 \(\pm\) 0.500 \({}^{\mathrm{l}}\) & 0.645 \(\pm\) 0.005 \({}^{\mathrm{e}}\) \\ C5 & 73.052 \(\pm\) 0.496 \({}^{\mathrm{h}}\) & 114.671 \(\pm\) 0.911 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\)_d.g._ & 138.012 \(\pm\) 1.532 \({}^{\mathrm{l}}\) & 102.573 \(\pm\) 0.711 \({}^{\mathrm{m}}\) & 0.635 \(\pm\) 0.006 \({}^{\mathrm{e}}\) \\ C6 & 86.747 \(\pm\) 0.856 \({}^{\mathrm{l}}\) & 113.323 \(\pm\) 1.262 \({}^{\mathrm{c}}\)_d.g._ & 100.100 \(\pm\) 0.340 \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\) & 125.105 \(\pm\) 0.631 \({}^{\mathrm{p}}\) & 0.420 \(\pm\) 0.003 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) \\ C7I & 87.798 \(\pm\) 0.490 \({}^{\mathrm{j}}\) & 107.871 \(\pm\) 1.369 \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\)_c.g._ & 114.951 \(\pm\) 0.585 \({}^{\mathrm{d}}\)_d.g._ & 136.063 \(\pm\) 0.981 \({}^{\mathrm{r}}\) & 0.471 \(\pm\) 0.002 \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\) \\ C7 II & 159.775 \(\pm\) 2.833 \({}^{\mathrm{k}}\) & 178.502 \(\pm\) 12.648 \({}^{\mathrm{n}}\) & 163.080 \(\pm\) 1.323 \({}^{\mathrm{n}}\) & 193.406 \(\pm\) 0.683 \({}^{\mathrm{l}}\) & 0.439 \(\pm\) 0.014 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) \\ \hline DD1I & 62.096 \(\pm\) 0.307 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 110.142 \(\pm\) 1.686 \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\)_d.g._ & 149.610 \(\pm\) 0.307 \({}^{\mathrm{k}}\) & 77.642 \(\pm\) 0.580 \({}^{\mathrm{h}}\) & 0.797 \(\pm\) 0.008 \({}^{\mathrm{l}}\) \\ DD1 III & 61.867 \(\pm\) 0.464 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 105.465 \(\pm\) 1.508 \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\) & 128.637 \(\pm\) 0.876 \({}^{\mathrm{g}}\) & 76.065 \(\pm\) 0.307 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 0.709 \(\pm\) 0.002 \({}^{\mathrm{h}}\)but not the quality and quantity of glutenin. This notion is confirmed by the low value of the GPI parameter for this passage flour stream (Table 6). Gluten Performance Index (GPI) was considered by [PERSON] et al.