Hard-to-cook phenomenon in common legumes: Chemistry, mechanisms and utilisation

Perera, Dilini N.; Devkota, Lavaraj; Garnier, Gil; Panozzo, Joe; Dhital, Sushil

doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2023.135743

Cited by 15 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 145 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the control, water absorption was slow but constant during soaking. No lag phase was found, which indicated a porous seed coat of the legume (Perera et al ., 2023). In contrast, samples that underwent sonication alone displayed higher water absorption kinetics, as these possessed already a hydrated and highly permeable seed coat.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of ultrasound‐assisted soaking on the hydration kinetics and physicochemical properties of chickpeas

Bender,

Yamsaengsung,

Waziiroh

et al. 2024

Int J of Food Sci Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryUnderstanding the behaviour of legumes during soaking results of importance since this might affect subsequent processing steps and thus final product quality. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of different ultrasound‐assisted soaking conditions (45.8–108.7 W cm−2 for 10–30 min) on the hydration, physicochemical and nutritional properties of kabuli chickpeas. During sonication, the temperature of the soaking media was either controlled at 20 °C (treatment referred to as US) or allowed to rise (treatment referred to as US + T). Selected temperature treatments without sonication (treatment referred to as T) were also included to identify thermal effects. Results showed that higher sonication intensities enhanced water imbibition up to a moisture content of 74.5% (w/w), being more pronounced in treatments where a temperature rise was allowed. Hydration kinetics were well described by the Peleg model (R2 = 0.961–0.998). Samples treated with temperature (US + T; T) showed high solid (0.8–5.1%), di‐ (13.2–59.7%) and α‐galactosyl‐sucrose oligosaccharide (5.4–58.7%) losses. In contrast, high US treatments enhanced oligosaccharides to up to 26.2% as well as pasting properties, while decreasing leaching losses (0.93–3.33%). Nutritional properties of sonicated chickpeas were only slightly affected after cooking following no clear trend. Overall, sonication was an effective pre‐treatment to reduce hydration time of up to 90% in chickpeas, especially when combined with temperature, and could be applied to drastically reduce the processing time of chickpea and chickpea flour in the food industry.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3B). Ions can significantly affect the texture and structural integrity of the legume during soaking and cooking, as they interact with proteins, as well as pectins and cellulose in the cell walls (Perera et al ., 2023). Therefore, understanding the extent of leaching is important for optimising soaking and cooking conditions.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of ultrasound‐assisted soaking on the hydration kinetics and physicochemical properties of chickpeas

Bender,

Yamsaengsung,

Waziiroh

et al. 2024

Int J of Food Sci Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Increasing evidence suggests that the cross linkages of pectin-cation-phytate may be responsible for the development of HTC defects. 6,84 The main phenomenon of HTC defects is delayed softening during thermal cooking of kidney beans. Koriyama et al showed that kidney bean NSPs of hemicellulose, cellulose, and cell wall polysaccharides would interact with Ca 2+ , thus delaying the softening process of the beans.…”

Section: Interactions Between Kidney Bean Nsps and Other Moleculesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-starch polysaccharides from kidney beans: comprehensive insight into their extraction, structure and physicochemical and nutritional properties

Kong,

Duan,

Zhang

et al. 2024

Food Funct.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Contributing factors to greater unevenness in the cooking could be both hardshell (also called hardseededness) and hard-to-cook defects that are common among pulses. 14 Hardseededness refers to the condition where certain seeds are unable to fully hydrate during the pre-soaking treatment, whereas hard-to-cook seeds are hydrated seeds that do not cook soft (i.e. never reach the desired softness).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Multiple factors interplay in the cooking behaviour of pulses, such as levels of different seed storage compounds, seed-coat structure, and field conditions during cultivation. 15 These factors are reviewed elsewhere, 7,14 but exactly how they interplay and which underpinning mechanisms are involved still need to be unravelled. In this study, this knowledge gap was addressed by investigating mature seeds of 24 diverse pea accessions across several variables to determine which variables measurably impact cooking time and cooking evenness.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cookability of 24 pea accessions—determining factors and potential predictors of cooking quality

Dueholm,

Fonskov,

Grimberg

et al. 2024

J Sci Food Agric

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundCooking time and cooking evenness are two critical quantities when determining the cooking quality (termed cookability) of pulses. Deciphering which factors contribute to pulse cookability is important for breeding new cultivars and the identification of potential cookability predictors can facilitate breeding efforts. Seeds from 24 morphologically diverse pea accessions were tested to identify contributing factors and potential predictors of the observed cookability using a Mattson cooker. Size‐ and weight‐based measures were recorded and seed‐coat hardness was obtained with a penetrometer. Content of protein, starch (amylose and amylopectin), and phytate was also determined.ResultsDistinct differences were found between wrinkled and non‐wrinkled seeds in terms of water‐absorption capacity, seed‐coat hardness, and plunger‐perforation speed.Potential predictive indicators of cooking time and cooking evenness were seed‐coat hardness (r = 0.49 and r = 0.38), relative area gained (r = ‐0.59 and r = ‐0.8), and percentage of swelled seeds after soaking (r = ‐0.49 and r = ‐0.58), but only for non‐wrinkled seeds. Surprisingly, the coefficients of variation for the profile area of both dry and swelled seeds appeared to be potential cookability predictors of all pea types (correlation coefficients around r = 0.5 and supported by principal component analysis). However, no strong correlation was observed between cookability and protein, starch, or phytate levels.ConclusionUsing three types of instruments together with chemical components, enabled the identification of novel cookability predictors for both cooking time and cooking evenness in pea. This study unveils the diverse quantitative aspects influencing cookability in pea. Considering both cooking time and cooking evenness as well as seed‐coat hardness, underscores the multifaceted nature of pulse cookability and offers important insights for future breeding strategies to enhance pea cultivars.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

show abstract

Hard-to-cook phenomenon in common legumes: Chemistry, mechanisms and utilisation

Cited by 15 publications

References 145 publications

Effect of ultrasound‐assisted soaking on the hydration kinetics and physicochemical properties of chickpeas

Effect of ultrasound‐assisted soaking on the hydration kinetics and physicochemical properties of chickpeas

Non-starch polysaccharides from kidney beans: comprehensive insight into their extraction, structure and physicochemical and nutritional properties

Cookability of 24 pea accessions—determining factors and potential predictors of cooking quality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About