2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.lwt.2012.02.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Physical and sensory characteristics of fibre-enriched sponge cakes made with Opuntia humifusa

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

12
49
6
2

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 74 publications
(69 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
12
49
6
2
Order By: Relevance
“…By forming a viscous solution, soluble fibres slow down intestinal transit, delay gastric emptying, and reduce glucose and sterol absorption by the intestine. Kim et al (2012) reported moisture values in the range of 30-32% and total fat between 7.5 and 7.9% in fibre-enriched sponge cake, while our mean values of sponge cakes with CLP were 29.37-31.10% for moisture and 5.02-5.16% for total lipids. According to Lu et al (2010), the mean results for the proximate composition of green tea sponge cake were in the range of 30.3-30.8% for moisture value, 7.0-8.0% for protein, 10.2-10.3% for fat, 0.9-1.2% for ash, and 50.3-51.3% for carbohydrates.…”
Section: Resultscontrasting
confidence: 74%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…By forming a viscous solution, soluble fibres slow down intestinal transit, delay gastric emptying, and reduce glucose and sterol absorption by the intestine. Kim et al (2012) reported moisture values in the range of 30-32% and total fat between 7.5 and 7.9% in fibre-enriched sponge cake, while our mean values of sponge cakes with CLP were 29.37-31.10% for moisture and 5.02-5.16% for total lipids. According to Lu et al (2010), the mean results for the proximate composition of green tea sponge cake were in the range of 30.3-30.8% for moisture value, 7.0-8.0% for protein, 10.2-10.3% for fat, 0.9-1.2% for ash, and 50.3-51.3% for carbohydrates.…”
Section: Resultscontrasting
confidence: 74%
“…The energy values to the sponge cake with CLP (between 292.65 and 294.68 kcal 100 g -1 ) were also different from the values reported by Kim et al (2012), which were in the range of 270-280 kcal 100 g -1…”
Section: Resultscontrasting
confidence: 72%
See 3 more Smart Citations