4.6 Article

Potential of a Techno-Functional Sourdough and Its Application in Sugar-Reduced Soft Buns

期刊

FERMENTATION-BASEL
卷 8, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/fermentation8020042

关键词

functional lactic acid bacteria; clean label strategy; sugar-reduced soft buns

资金

  1. [27772.1 PFLS-LS]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the potential of two lactic acid bacteria strains as starter cultures in sourdough fermentation. The results showed that both strains had high effectiveness in sourdough buns with reduced sugar content. One strain produced acetic acid and mannitol, while the other strain influenced the volume and texture of the buns.
Functional lactic acid bacteria (LAB) as starter cultures used in sourdough fermentation have been researched for years. This study evaluated the LAB strains Leuconostoc citreum DCM65 (mannitol, exopolysaccharide producing, antifungal activity) and Lactiplantibacillus plantarum subsp. plantarum MA418 (amylolytic activity) and their potential as single or co-culture starters in sourdough fermented buns containing different levels of sugar (control 9% and reduced 0, 3, 6%). Cell counts, pH development, and organic acids were determined before and after sourdough fermentation (30 degrees C, 24 h) and physical properties (color, volume, pore structure, and texture) of buns produced thereof were determined after baking. Sourdoughs started with DCM65 and/or MA418 developed up to log 9.2 CFU/g presumptive LAB after 24 h, assertiveness of the added starter cultures species was confirmed by MALDI-TOF MS. Acetic acid and mannitol were only detected in sourdough fermented with DCM65 (single or co-culture) up to 2.5 mg/g and 9.8 mg/g, respectively. The starter cultures applied influenced physical properties of buns. Sourdough buns started with MA418 had higher volume and slice area, and softer crumb; in contrast, buns fermented with DCM65 had a finer pore structure. In summary, both starter cultures showed high potential in sourdough buns with reduced sugar content.

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