Farinograph responses for wheat flour dough fortified with wheat gluten produced by cold-ethanol or water displacement of starch

Citation
Gh. Robertson et Tk. Cao, Farinograph responses for wheat flour dough fortified with wheat gluten produced by cold-ethanol or water displacement of starch, CEREAL CHEM, 78(5), 2001, pp. 538-542
Citations number
29
Categorie Soggetti
Agricultural Chemistry
Journal title
CEREAL CHEMISTRY
ISSN journal
00090352 → ACNP
Volume
78
Issue
5
Year of publication
2001
Pages
538 - 542
Database
ISI
SICI code
0009-0352(200109/10)78:5<538:FRFWFD>2.0.ZU;2-1
Abstract
The objective of this research was to identify and define mixing characteri stics of gluten-fortified flours attributable to differences in the method for producing the gluten. In these studies, a wheat gluten concentrate (W-g luten) was produced using a conventional process model. This model applied physical water displacement of starch (dispersion and screening steps), fre eze-drying, and milling. W-gluten was the reference or "vital" gluten in th is report. An experimental W-concentrate was produced using a new process m odel. The new model applied cold-ethanol (CE) displacement of starch (dispe rsion and screening steps), freeze-drying, and milling. Freeze-drying was u sed to eliminate thermal denaturation and thereby focus on functional chang es due only to the separation method. The dry gluten concentrates were blen ded with a weak, low-protein (9.2%), soft wheat flour and developed with wa ter in a microfarinograph. We found that both water and cold-ethanol proces sed gluten successfully increased the stability (St) and improved mixing to lerance index (MTI) to create in the blended flour the appearance of a brea dbaking flour, Notably, in the tested range of 9-15% protein, the St for CE -gluten was always higher then the St for W-gluten. Furthermore, the margin al increase in St (slope of the linear St vs. protein concentration) for th e CE-gluten was approximate to 57% greater than that for the W-gluten. The slope of the MTI vs. protein data was lower for the CE-gluten by 24%. Flour fortified with CE-gluten exhibited higher water absorption (up to 1.8% uni ts at 13.5% P) than flour fortified with W-gluten.