4.7 Article

Effects of common buckwheat bran on wheat dough properties and noodle quality compared with common buckwheat hull

期刊

LWT-FOOD SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 155, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.lwt.2021.112971

关键词

Common buckwheat; Bran and hull; Dough properties; Noodle quality

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology of Jilin Province [20190301028NY]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The addition of common buckwheat bran can improve the properties of wheat dough and the quality of noodles, affecting dough hardness and tensile properties significantly, while reducing cooking loss and enhancing thermal stability. Compared with buckwheat hull, common buckwheat bran is more suitable for processing pasta products.
In this study, the effects of common buckwheat bran on wheat dough properties and noodle quality compared with hull were explored by pasting, rheology, texture, cooking, thermal properties, and microstructure measurements. The properties of dough and quality of noodles with buckwheat bran were better than those including buckwheat hull. Starch pasting properties declined when common buckwheat bran or hull was added because the fiber absorbed water and prevented the swelling of starch particles. Both the storage modulus (G ') and loss modulus (G '') of common buckwheat bran dough were higher than that of buckwheat hull dough. When 4% buckwheat bran or hull was added, the dough exhibited good hardness and chewiness. The tensile properties of buckwheat bran noodles were better than that of buckwheat hull samples while the cooking loss and Delta H of buckwheat bran noodles was lower. SEM analysis showed that a continuous gluten network was formed when the buckwheat bran or hull was lower than 5%. This study demonstrated that common buckwheat bran had a positive effect on wheat dough properties and noodle quality compared with buckwheat hull. This provided a technical foundation for processing novel nutritive common buckwheat products in the future.

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

4.7
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