Advertisement

Formulation of bread model doughs with resistant starch, vegetable proteins and transglutaminase

  • Noemi Baldino
  • Ilaria Carnevale
  • Francesca Laitano
  • Francesca R. Lupi
  • Stefano Curcio
  • Domenico GabrieleEmail author
Original Paper
  • 16 Downloads

Abstract

The rheological properties of model doughs based on a resistant maize starch, rich in amylose, and vegetable proteins (either soy or hemp) were investigated, with the aim of assessing their potential use in the production of bread without gluten and rich in new vegetable proteins and fibre. With the purpose of improving the structural properties of investigated doughs, a cross-linking enzyme, i.e. transglutaminase (TG), was also added to evaluate its potential effects on adopted proteins, whereas no further hydrocolloid was added to the mixture. A rheological characterisation based on shear tests, in linear conditions at different temperatures, and elongational tests, in non linear conditions, was performed, to evaluate the potential properties of the dough for breadmaking use. In addition, a qualitative analysis of baked samples was performed to investigate a potential relation between rheological properties and crumb texture. It was observed that doughs prepared with hemp protein exhibit properties closer to those of a wheat dough and yield loaves with higher height. TG affects the properties of dough prepared with hemp protein increasing both dynamic moduli and gelatinisation temperatures. On the other hand, when soy protein is used, relevant effects of TG are observed mainly on the onset of gelatinisation that is shifted towards higher values. Obtained results evidence that hemp protein and the adopted resistant starch can be interesting raw materials for bread production even if further work is necessary to improve the dough characteristics.

Keywords

Rheology Resistant starch Hemp protein Soy protein Transglutaminase Extensional properties 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Compliance with ethics requirements

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Supplementary material

217_2019_3409_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (1010 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 1010 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Kaur S, Das M (2011) Functional foods: an overview. Food Sci Biotechnol 20:861–875.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10068-011-0121-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mastromatteo M, Danza A, Guida M, Del Nobile MA (2012) Formulation optimisation of vegetable flour-loaded functional bread part I: screening of vegetable flours and structuring agents. Int J Food Sci Technol 47:1313–1320.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2012.02975.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Roccia P, Ribotta PD, Pérez GT, León AE (2009) Influence of soy protein on rheological properties and water retention capacity of wheat gluten. LWT Food Sci Technol 42:358–362.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LWT.2008.03.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Marco C, Rosell CM (2008) Breadmaking performance of protein enriched, gluten-free breads. Eur Food Res Technol 227:1205–1213.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-008-0838-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fuller S, Beck E, Salman H, Tapsell L (2016) New horizons for the study of dietary fiber and health: a review. Plant Foods Hum Nutr 71:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11130-016-0529-6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Anderson JW, Baird P, Davis RH et al (2009) Health benefits of dietary fiber. Nutr Rev 67:188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tang CH, Ten Z, Wang XS, Yang XQ (2006) Physicochemical and functional properties of hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) protein isolate. J Agric Food Chem 54:8945–8950.  https://doi.org/10.1021/jf0619176 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Colombani PC (2004) Glycemic index and load—dynamic dietary guidelines in the context of diseases. Physiol Behav 83:603–610.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PHYSBEH.2004.07.029 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Korus J, Witczak M, Ziobro R, Juszczak L (2009) The impact of resistant starch on characteristics of gluten-free dough and bread. Food Hydrocoll 23:988–995.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FOODHYD.2008.07.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Englyst KN, Liu S, Englyst HN (2007) Nutritional characterization and measurement of dietary carbohydrates. Eur J Clin Nutr 61:S19–S39.  https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602937 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fuentes-Zaragoza E, Riquelme-Navarrete MJ, Sánchez-Zapata E, Pérez-Álvarez JA (2010) Resistant starch as functional ingredient: a review. Food Res Int 43:931–942.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FOODRES.2010.02.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schmiele M, Ferrari Felisberto MH, Pedrosa Silva Clerici MT, Chang YK (2017) Mixolab™ for rheological evaluation of wheat flour partially replaced by soy protein hydrolysate and fructooligosaccharides for bread production. LWT Food Sci Technol 76:259–269.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LWT.2016.07.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhou J, Liu J, Tang X (2018) Effects of whey and soy protein addition on bread rheological property of wheat flour. J Texture Stud 49:38–46.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jtxs.12275 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Švec I, Hrušková M (2015) The Mixolab parameters of composite wheat/hemp flour and their relation to quality features. LWT Food Sci Technol 60:623–629.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LWT.2014.07.034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Korus J, Witczak M, Ziobro R, Juszczak L (2017) Hemp (Cannabis sativa subsp. sativa) flour and protein preparation as natural nutrients and structure forming agents in starch based gluten-free bread. LWT 84:143–150.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LWT.2017.05.046 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sanchez DBO, Puppo MC, Añon MC et al (2014) Effect of maize resistant starch and transglutaminase: a study of fundamental and empirical rheology properties of pan bread dough. Food Bioprocess Technol 7:2865–2876.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-013-1246-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Witczak M, Juszczak L, Ziobro R, Korus J (2012) Influence of modified starches on properties of gluten-free dough and bread. Part I: rheological and thermal properties of gluten-free dough. Food Hydrocoll 28:353–360.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FOODHYD.2012.01.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Baldino N, Laitano F, Lupi FR et al (2018) Effect of HPMC and CMC on rheological behavior at different temperatures of gluten-free bread formulations based on rice and buckwheat flours. Eur Food Res Technol 244:1829–1842.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-018-3096-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Matos ME, Rosell CM (2015) Understanding gluten-free dough for reaching breads with physical quality and nutritional balance. J Sci Food Agric 95:653–661.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.6732 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Isaschar-Ovdat S, Fishman A (2018) Crosslinking of food proteins mediated by oxidative enzymes—a review. Trends Food Sci Technol 72:134–143.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TIFS.2017.12.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dube M, Schäfer C, Neidhart S, Carle R (2007) Texturisation and modification of vegetable proteins for food applications using microbial transglutaminase. Eur Food Res Technol 225:287–299.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-006-0401-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Demirkesen L, Mert B, Sumnu G, Sahin S (2010) Rheological properties of gluten-free bread formulations. J Food Eng 96:295–303.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2009.08.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Marco C, Rosell CM (2008) Effect of different protein isolates and transglutaminase on rice flour properties. J Food Eng 84:132–139.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JFOODENG.2007.05.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ng TSK, McKinley GH (2008) Power law gels at finite strains: the nonlinear rheology of gluten gels. J Rheol (N Y N Y) 52:417–449.  https://doi.org/10.1122/1.2828018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Peressini D, Sensidoni A, Pollini CM et al (2002) Filled-snacks production by co-extrusion-cooking. Part 3. A rheological-based method to compare filler processing properties. J Food Eng 54:227–240.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0260-8774(01)00208-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Baldino N, Gabriele D, Lupi FR et al (2014) Modeling of baking behavior of semi-sweet short dough biscuits. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 25:40–52.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2013.12.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Migliori M, Gabriele D, Baldino N et al (2011) Rheological properties of batter dough: effect of egg level. J Food Process Eng 34:1266–1281.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4530.2009.00410.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gabriele D, de Cindio B, D’Antona P (2001) A weak gel model for foods. Rheol Acta 40:120–127.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s003970000139 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kokelaar JJ, van Vliet T, Prins A (1996) Strain hardening properties and extensibility of flour and gluten doughs in relation to breadmaking performance. J Cereal Sci 24:199–214.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jcrs.1996.0053 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Marino R, Giovando S, Gabriele D (2014) Effect of tannin addition on the rheological properties of starch-based adhesives. Appl Rheol.  https://doi.org/10.3933/ApplRheol-24-46138 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sanz T, Salvador A, Fiszman SM (2008) Evaluation of four types of resistant starch in muffin baking performance and relationship with batter rheology. Eur Food Res Technol 227:813–819.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-007-0791-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jacobs H, Delcour JA (2002) Hydrothermal modifications of granular starch, with retention of the granular structure: a review. J Agric Food Chem 46:2895–2905.  https://doi.org/10.1021/jf980169k CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Dapčević-Hadnađev T, Hadnađev M, Lazaridou A et al (2018) Hempseed meal protein isolates prepared by different isolation techniques. Part II. Gelation properties at different ionic strengths. Food Hydrocoll 81:481–489.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FOODHYD.2018.03.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Champenois Y, Rao MA, Walker LP (1998) Influence of gluten on the viscoelastic properties of starch pastes and gels. J Sci Food Agric 78:119–126.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0010(199809)78:1%3c119:aid-jsfa98%3e3.0.co;2-i CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Jekle M, Mühlberger K, Becker T (2016) Starch–gluten interactions during gelatinization and its functionality in dough like model systems. Food Hydrocoll 54(Part A):196–201.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2015.10.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Moore MM, Heinbockel M, Dockery P et al (2006) Network formation in gluten-free bread with application of transglutaminase. Cereal Chem J 83:28–36.  https://doi.org/10.1094/CC-83-0028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Baldino N, Gabriele D, Migliori M (2010) The influence of formulation and cooling rate on the rheological properties of chocolate. Eur Food Res Technol 231:821–828.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-010-1334-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Baldino N, Gabriele D, Lupi FR et al (2014) Rheological behaviour of fresh cement pastes: influence of synthetic zeolites, limestone and silica fume. Cem Concr Res 63:38–45.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2014.04.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Schiedt B, Baumann A, Conde-Petit B, Vilgis TA (2013) Short- and long-range interactions governing the viscoelastic properties during wheat dough and model dough development. J Texture Stud 44:317–332.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jtxs.12027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    van Vliet T (2008) Strain hardening as an indicator of bread-making performance: a review with discussion. J Cereal Sci 48:1–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCS.2007.08.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Song Y, Zheng Q (2008) Influence of gliadin removal on strain hardening of hydrated wheat gluten during equibiaxial extensional deformation. J Cereal Sci 48:58–67.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCS.2007.08.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rouillé J, Della Valle G, Lefebvre J et al (2005) Shear and extensional properties of bread doughs affected by their minor components. J Cereal Sci 42:45–57.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCS.2004.12.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Noemi Baldino
    • 1
  • Ilaria Carnevale
    • 1
  • Francesca Laitano
    • 1
  • Francesca R. Lupi
    • 1
  • Stefano Curcio
    • 1
  • Domenico Gabriele
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Information, Modeling, Electronics and System Engineering(D.I.M.E.S.) University of CalabriaRendeItaly

Personalised recommendations