4.7 Article

Total phenolic, flavonoid content, and antioxidant activity of flour, noodles, and steamed bread made from different colored wheat grains by three milling methods

Journal

CROP JOURNAL
Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 328-334

Publisher

KEAI PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cj.2015.04.004

Keywords

Total phenolic content; Total flavonoid content; Milling method; Antioxidant activity; Colored wheat

Funding

  1. Special Funds for Industry System [CARS-03]
  2. Science and Technology Support Program [2012BAD04B07-03]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of wheat variety, food processing, and milling method on antioxidant properties. Black wheat variety Heibaoshi 1 had the highest total phenolic content (659.8 mu g gallic acid equivalents g(-1)), total flavonoid content (319.3 mu g rutin equivalents g-1), and antioxidant activity, whereas light purple wheat variety Shandongzimai 1 had the lowest total flavonoid content (236.2 mu g rutin equivalents g-1) and antioxidant activity. Whole wheat flour and partially debranned grain flour had significantly higher total phenolic contents, total flavonoid contents, and antioxidant activity than refined flour (P < 0.05). Compared with flour, total phenolic contents, total flavonoid contents and antioxidant activity decreased in noodles and steamed bread, whereas noodles had slightly higher total phenolic and flavonoid content than steamed bread. Antioxidant activities (by ferric reducing ability of plasma assay) of steamed bread made from whole wheat flour, partially debranned grain flour, and refined flour were 23.5%, 21.1%, and 31.6% lower, respectively, than the corresponding values of flour. These results suggested that black whole wheat flour and partially debranned grain flour are beneficial to human health. (C) 2015 Crop Science Society of China and Institute of Crop Science, CAAS. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.

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