Wheat/hemp and wheat/teff model composites were prepared as 90:10 and 80:20 w/w blends, using two different Czech commercial wheat flour samples (standards M, M1) and bright/dark forms of these non-traditional crops f...Wheat/hemp and wheat/teff model composites were prepared as 90:10 and 80:20 w/w blends, using two different Czech commercial wheat flour samples (standards M, M1) and bright/dark forms of these non-traditional crops flour. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of alternative flour samples on the blend compositional profiles including dietary fibre content, on the technological quality described by modern Solvent Retention Capacity method and on laboratory baking test results. According to seeds composition, nutritional flour enrichment reached higher levels of protein (from approx. 13.0% about 30% vs. 6%) and fibre contents (from approx. 3.3% about 50% vs. 30%) in the case of hemp and teff samples. In terms of the SRC profile, the qualitatively better sample M was weakened by hemp flour additions, while somewhat worse sample M1 was improved by teff flour additions. Results from the baking test showed that the hemp composites were partly dependent on hemp flour form. Volumes of bread with bright hemp were diminished from 257 mL/100g up to 196 mL/100g, the products containing dark hemp increased up to 328 mL/100g. Teff-fortified bun volumes were evaluated in close range of 325 - 369 mL/100g against 381 mL/100g for standard M1. Sensorial score of wheat/hemp breads were worse owing to spicy taste and fatty aftertaste, while hay-like by-taste in wheat/teff bread could be tolerable of 10% in recipe.展开更多
基金The research was performed under project“New Food”of the NAZV,Czech Republic,No.321 51 15 10.
文摘Wheat/hemp and wheat/teff model composites were prepared as 90:10 and 80:20 w/w blends, using two different Czech commercial wheat flour samples (standards M, M1) and bright/dark forms of these non-traditional crops flour. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of alternative flour samples on the blend compositional profiles including dietary fibre content, on the technological quality described by modern Solvent Retention Capacity method and on laboratory baking test results. According to seeds composition, nutritional flour enrichment reached higher levels of protein (from approx. 13.0% about 30% vs. 6%) and fibre contents (from approx. 3.3% about 50% vs. 30%) in the case of hemp and teff samples. In terms of the SRC profile, the qualitatively better sample M was weakened by hemp flour additions, while somewhat worse sample M1 was improved by teff flour additions. Results from the baking test showed that the hemp composites were partly dependent on hemp flour form. Volumes of bread with bright hemp were diminished from 257 mL/100g up to 196 mL/100g, the products containing dark hemp increased up to 328 mL/100g. Teff-fortified bun volumes were evaluated in close range of 325 - 369 mL/100g against 381 mL/100g for standard M1. Sensorial score of wheat/hemp breads were worse owing to spicy taste and fatty aftertaste, while hay-like by-taste in wheat/teff bread could be tolerable of 10% in recipe.
