4.5 Article

Textural and sensory characteristics of sugar-free biscuit formulated with quinoa flour, isomalt, and maltodextrin

期刊

FOOD SCIENCE & NUTRITION
卷 9, 期 12, 页码 6501-6512

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/fsn3.2564

关键词

optimization; quinoa; response surface method; sugar -free biscuit

资金

  1. Kamvar company, Isfahan, Iran

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A study on creating low-calorie biscuits using quinoa flour, isomalt, and maltodextrin showed that the optimized biscuits had higher total phenolic compounds and nutritional value. In sensory evaluation, replacing wheat flour with quinoa flour was well-received. The optimized biscuits contained more protein and dietary fiber.
A low-calorie biscuit formulation containing quinoa flour (cultivars TTKK), isomalt, and maltodextrin was optimized using response surface methodology. Optimized samples were evaluated in terms of total phenolic compounds (TPC), sensory properties, and nutritional value while samples containing only wheat flour (Pishgam var.) and sucrose were used as control. Morphology of isolated starch from quinoa was also investigated. The results showed that with increasing amounts of quinoa, isomalt, and maltodextrin Delta E and Browning index increased, whereas hardness and L values decreased. The formulation containing 25% quinoa flour, 3.5% maltodextrin, and 10% isomalt was found to be optimal with an overall desirability value of 0.95. The sensory evaluation showed that replacement of wheat flour with 25 g/100 g quinoa flour in biscuits was acceptable. TPC of the optimal biscuit (1,180.34 +/- 0.02 mu g GAE/g) was higher than that of the control sample (729.95 +/- 0.007 mu g GAE/g). In addition, the optimized biscuit had more protein (8.36 +/- 0.035%) and dietary fiber (2.14 +/- 0.035%) content compared with the control sample (7.01 +/- 0.007% and 1.66 +/- 0.028%, respectively). The consumption of 100 g of optimized quinoa biscuits supplies the daily requirement of Fe, Mg, Ca, and Zn at 2.43%, 44.81%, 19.46% and 1.12%, respectively.

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

4.5
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