4.7 Article

Rheological and secondary structural characterization of rice flour-zein composites for noodles slit from gluten-free sheeted dough

Journal

FOOD CHEMISTRY
Volume 221, Issue -, Pages 1539-1545

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.10.139

Keywords

Rice flour-zein composite; Viscoelasticity; Gluten-free; Sheeted dough; Noodle

Funding

  1. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning [2015R1A2A1A15052987]
  2. Cooperative Research Program for Agriculture Science & Technology Development, Rural Development Administration, Republic of Korea [PJ0116752015]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2015R1A2A1A15052987] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Rice flour-zein composites in a hydrated viscoelastic state were utilized to compensate for the role of wheat gluten in gluten-free sheeted dough. The use of zein above its glass transition temperature was able to form a viscoelastic protein network of non-wheat dough with rice flour. The mixing stability and development time of the rice dough were positively increased with increasing levels of zein. The protein secondary structural analysis by FTIR spectroscopy demonstrated that the rice doughs with high levels of zein showed significant increases in beta-sheet structures whose intensity was almost doubled by the use of 10% zein. The use of zein at more than 5% (w/w) successfully produced gluten-free dough sheets that could be slit into thin and long noodle strands. In addition, the composites were effective in improving the rheological characteristics of gluten-free noodle strands by increasing their maximum force to extension, compared to wheat-based noodles. (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