Table 2. Comparison of quality characteristics of commercial makgeolli grouped by nuruk type and yeast use
| Samples1) | Alcohol (%) | pH | Total acidity (%) | Soluble solids (Brix°) | Reducing sugar (%) |
| RN1 | 12.62±0.042) | 3.96±0.00 | 0.46±0.01 | 8.97±0.19 | 0.02±0.00 |
| RN2 | 8.63±0.15 | 4.74±0.00 | 0.30±0.00 | 5.00±0.16 | 0.48±0.00 |
| RN3 | 8.01±0.02 | 4.03±0.02 | 0.71±0.02 | 15.63±0.09 | 0.54±0.00 |
| Mean±SD | 9.75±2.05b3) | 4.24±0.35b | 0.49±0.17a | 9.87±4.39b | 0.35±0.23a |
| WN1 | 12.22±0.00 | 4.45±0.00 | 0.27±0.00 | 6.77±0.21 | 0.15±0.00 |
| WN2 | 8.07±0.02 | 3.99±0.01 | 0.42±0.01 | 3.63±0.12 | 0.64±0.00 |
| WN3 | 6.72±0.16 | 3.39±0.00 | 0.60±0.00 | 5.13±0.09 | 0.24±0.01 |
| WN4 | 12.82±0.02 | 4.21±0.00 | 0.49±0.01 | 13.30±0.00 | 0.60±0.00 |
| WN5 | 5.98±0.05 | 3.98±0.01 | 0.29±0.00 | 2.20±0.08 | 0.61±0.00 |
| WN6 | 9.99±0.01 | 3.95±0.00 | 0.40±0.01 | 6.73±0.09 | 0.17±0.00 |
| Mean±SD | 9.30±2.60ab | 3.99±0.32a | 0.41±0.11a | 6.29±3.53a | 0.40±0.22ab |
| WNY1 | 6.59±0.04 | 4.58±0.00 | 0.21±0.00 | 7.63±0.17 | 0.82±0.02 |
| WNY2 | 10.62±0.04 | 4.33±0.00 | 0.36±0.01 | 11.17±0.09 | 0.65±0.02 |
| WNY3 | 7.78±0.01 | 4.22±0.00 | 0.48±0.01 | 8.23±0.05 | 0.53±0.00 |
| WNY4 | 6.28±0.01 | 4.09±0.02 | 0.22±0.01 | 2.63±0.09 | 0.16±0.00 |
| WNY5 | 8.83±0.02 | 3.97±0.00 | 0.68±0.00 | 11.50±0.00 | 0.53±0.00 |
| WNY6 | 5.43±0.03 | 4.08±0.00 | 0.28±0.00 | 6.70±0.22 | 0.54±0.00 |
| Mean±SD | 7.59±1.74a | 4.21±0.20ab | 0.37±0.17a | 7.98±2.97ab | 0.54±0.20b |
| Total | 8.71±2.37 | 4.13±0.31 | 0.41±0.15 | 7.68±3.76 | 0.45±0.23 |
RN, rice nuruk; WN, wheat nuruk; WNY, wheat nuruk and yeast.
All values are mean±SD (n=3).
Values with different superscript letters indicate the significant differences according to Duncan’s multiple range test (p<0.05).