No abstract

The network‐forming attributes of gluten have been investigated for decades, but no study has comprehensively addressed the differences in gluten network evolution between strong and weak wheat types (hard and soft wheat). This study monitored changes in SDS protein extractability, SDS‐accessible thiols, protein surface hydrophobicity, molecular weight distribution, and secondary structural features of proteins during mixing to bring out the molecular determinants of protein network formation in hard and soft wheat dough. Soft wheat flour and dough exhibited greater protein extractability and more accessible thiols than hard wheat flour and dough. The addition of the thiol‐blocking agent N‐ethylmaleimide (NEM) resulted in similar results for protein extractability and accessible thiols in hard and soft wheat samples. Soft wheat dough had greater protein surface hydrophobicity than hard wheat and exhibited a larger decrease in surface hydrophobicity in the presence of NEM. Formation of high‐molecular‐weight (HMW) protein in soft wheat dough was primarily because of formation of disulfides among low‐molecular‐weight (LMW) proteins, as indicated by the absence of changes in protein distribution when NEM was present, whereas in hard wheat dough the LMW fraction formed disulfide interaction with the HMW fraction. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy indicated formation of β‐sheets in dough from either wheat type at peak mixing torque. Formation of β‐sheets in soft wheat dough appears to be driven by hydrophobic interactions, whereas disulfide linkages stabilize secondary structure elements in hard wheat dough.

The aim of this work was to elucidate the underlying physical mechanism(s) by which bran influences whole grain dough properties by monitoring the state of water and gluten secondary structure in wheat flour and bran doughs containing 35–50% moisture and 0–10% added bran. The system was studied with attenuated total reflectance (ATR) FTIR spectroscopy. Comparison of the OH stretch band of water in flour dough with that in H2O‐D2O mixtures having the same water content revealed the formation of two distinct water populations in flour dough corresponding to IR absorption frequencies at 3,600 and 3,200 cm–1. The band intensity at 3,200 cm–1, which is related to water bound to the dough matrix, decreased and shifted to lower frequencies with increasing moisture content of the dough. Addition of bran to the dough caused redistribution of water in the flour and bran dough system, as evidenced by shifts in OH stretch frequency in the 3,200 cm–1 region to higher frequencies and a reduction in monomeric water (free water). This water redistribution affected the secondary structure of gluten in the dough, as evidenced by changes in the second‐derivative ATR‐FTIR difference spectra in the amide I region. Bran addition caused an increase in β‐sheet content and a decrease in β‐turn (β‐spiral) content. However, this bran‐induced transconformational change in gluten was more significant in the 2137 flour dough than in Overley flour dough. This study revealed that when bran is added to flour dough, water redistribution among dough components promotes partial dehydration of gluten and collapse of β‐spirals into β‐sheet structures. This transconformational change may be the physical basis for the poor quality of bread containing added bran.

No abstract

No abstract