Effect of Heat-Moisture Treatment on the Physicochemical Properties and Starch Digestibility of Mix Powder (Wheat Flour-Black Soybean Flour) and Corresponding Cookies

Abstract

In order to improve the nutritional value and reduce starch the digestibility of black soybean cookies, superfine black soybean flour was modified by heat-moisture treatment (HMT). The physicochemical properties, structure analysis of the flour samples and corresponding dough, and nutritional, physical, and textural properties of the cookies were investigated. After HMT, the water and lactic acid retention capacity and the oil binding capacity of mix powder dramatically increased, being almost twice the value of the untreated sample. HMT increased gelatinization temperature by about 10 °C but decreased gelatinization enthalpy. HMT had no apparent effect on the morphology and size of granules, but some cracks and pores appeared on the HMT-mix powder granules and corresponding dough. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy analysis showed that the ordered structure of dough was unaffected during HMT. After HMT, the thickness, density, and baking loss of the cookies increased, and the spread ratio decreased. HMT dramatically increased the chemical score of cookies from 12.35% in mix powder cookies to 19.64% in HMT-mix powder cookies. HMT decreased the rapidly digestible starch content, while the slowly digestible starch increased from 45.97% in mix powder cookies to 49.31% in HMT-mix powder cookies, and RS increased from 21.64% to 26.87%. Overall, HMT did not have a negative effect on the processing properties and microstructure and secondary structure of the dough, or the physical properties and quality of the cookies, but significantly improved the nutritional properties and decreased the starch digestibility of the cookies.

The effects of heat-moisture treatment on resistant starch levels in cassava and on fermentation, methanogenesis, and microbial populations in ruminants

“…It was observed that HMT altered nutrition characteristics in cassava, in agreement with previous findings identifying characteristic nutritional changes in different starch sources after HMT [21]. Yang et al [22] reported that HMT lowered moisture, crude fiber, ash, crude protein, and crude fat levels. This finding was in contrast with our findings of decreased OM and increased crude protein and fat content by HMT=Heat-moisture treatment, HMT0=Without heat-moisture treatment (control), HMT1=One cycle of heat-moisture treatment, HMT2=Two cycles of heat-moisture treatment, HMT3=Three cycles of heat-moisture treatment, SEM=standard error of mean, B=Maximum gas production, k=Rate of gas production, L=Lag time, h=Hour, and superscript differences on the same line indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) HMT.…”

“…Yang et al . [ 22 ] reported that HMT lowered moisture, crude fiber, ash, crude protein, and crude fat levels. This finding was in contrast with our findings of decreased OM and increased crude protein and fat content by HMT.…”

“…Heat-moisture treatment is a physical modification that increases RS content by increasing retrograde starch from cooled gelatinized starch [ 5 ]. This retrograde starch resists amylase activity [ 8 , 22 ]. Resistant starch resists enzymatic degradation due to α-1,4 linked glucose (amylose) in crystalline lattices [ 40 ].…”

Effects of Replacing Butter with SPAN80-Tailored Soywax/Rice Bran Oil Oleogel in Food Product: A Study on Whole Wheat Cookies

“…Freshly baked potatoes were allowed to cool for about 2 h and then cut into small square pieces. After that, the samples were mounted onto the sputter coater to sputter-coat the samples with a thin layer of platinum (Pt) under vacuum . Lastly, the Pt-coated samples were attached to double-sided carbon tape mounted on an aluminum stub and placed into the SEM microscope .…”

“…After that, the samples were mounted onto the sputter coater to sputter-coat the samples with a thin layer of platinum (Pt) under vacuum. 27 Lastly, the Pt-coated samples were attached to double-sided carbon tape mounted on an aluminum stub and placed into the SEM microscope. 28 The cookie samples were then observed under two magnification levels of 50× and 100×.…”