4.7 Article

Developing gluten free bakery improvers by hydrothermal treatment of rice and corn flours

Journal

LWT-FOOD SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 73, Issue -, Pages 342-350

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.lwt.2016.06.032

Keywords

Breadmaking; Gluten free; Hydrothermal treatment; Rice; Corn

Funding

  1. Spanish Scientific Research Council (CSIC)
  2. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Sustainability [AGL2014-52928-C2-1-R]
  3. European Regional Development Fund (FEDER)
  4. Generalitat Valenciana [2012/064]
  5. Institute of Nutrition, Food and Agrofood Technology (I.N.A.T.A.A.)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The impact of hydrothermal treatment of rice and corn flours on their potential as gluten free bakery improvers was tested. Hydrothermal treatment of flours was carried out by suspending flours in water on the basis of 5/1 (w/w) and heated until 65 degrees C. Corn or rice semolina supplemented by field bean semolina in ratio of 2/1 (w/w) were used for obtaining protein enriched gluten free breads, where improvers functionality was tested. Two central composite designs involving water hydration levels (X-1, X-1') and the level of hydrothermally treated rice or corn flours (X-2, X-2') were used. Instrumental analyses of breads (specific volume, moisture content, crumb texture and height/width ratio) were carried out to assess the impact of experimental factors. Results showed that hydrothermal treatment of rice or corn flours affected in different extent the bread properties, increasing the specific volume of breads and H/W ratio, and decreasing the hardness and chewiness of both types of breads. The optimum formulation for rice/field bean bread contained 7.59 g/100 g treated rice flour and 96.66 g/100 g water, and for corn/field bean bread the optimum included 4.73 g/100 g treated corn and 78.81 g/100 g water. Optimized breads were found acceptable according to color and texture structure. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available