4.6 Article

Maize Milling By-Products: From Food Wastes to Functional Ingredients Through Lactic Acid Bacteria Fermentation

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MICROBIOLOGY
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00561

关键词

maize; milling by-products; lactic acid fermentation; high-fiber; nutritional profile

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although recognized as important sources of functional compounds, milling by-products are often removed from the cereal kernel prior milling process. Indeed, the high presence of fiber in bran and the co-presence of lipids and lipase in germ are often considered as downsides for breadmaking. In this work, Lactobacillus plantarum T6B10 and Weissella confusa BAN8 were used as selected starters to ferment maize milling byproducts mixtures made with heat-treated or raw germ and bran. The effects on the biochemical and nutritional features as well as the stability of the milling by-products were investigated. Lactic acid bacteria metabolisms improved the free amino acids and peptides concentrations and the antioxidant activity and caused a relevant phytic acid degradation. Moreover, fermentation allowed a marked decrease of the lipase activity, stabilizing the matrix by preventing oxidative processes. The use of fermented by-products as ingredients improved the nutritional, textural and sensory properties of wheat bread. Fortified breads (containing 25% of fermented by-products) were characterized by a concentration in dietary fiber and proteins of ca. 11 and 13% of dry matter, respectively. Compared to the use of the unfermented ones, the addition of pre-fermented by-products to bread caused a significant increase in protein digestibility (up to 60%), and a relevant decrease of the starch hydrolysis index (ca. 13%). According to the results, this study demonstrates the potential of fermentation to convert maize bran and germ, commonly considered food wastes, into nutritive improvers, meeting nutritional and sensory requests of modern consumers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据