Physical, sensory, in‐vitro starch digestibility and glycaemic index of granola bars prepared using sucrose alternatives

Abstract

SummaryGranola bars were prepared using barley flakes, groundnut bits, cocoa powder, sucrose and/or sucrose alternatives (coconut sugar, fructooligosaccharide and inulin). Apart from sensory acceptance, nutritional composition, energy values and glycaemic responses (glycaemic index, GI and glycaemic load, GL) of the bars were evaluated. Physico‐chemical properties and sensorial acceptance of granola bar made with coconut sugar and fructooligosaccharide were on par with those made with sucrose. Further, all formulated granola bars, except with inulin, were intermediate moisture foods. GI of all five formulations of granola bars was <55; ranging between 51 and 54.9, corresponding to low glycaemic food. Granola bars with coconut sugar had high GL (≥20), while bars prepared with FOS, inulin and without sugar were in the medium range (>10 to <20). Effect of choice of raw materials, complexity of matrix structure and particle size of ingredients on GI and GL of the bars is explained.

Physicochemical properties and sensory evaluation of high energy cereal bar and its consumer acceptability

“…The addition of these sweeteners can affect the solid cohesion of HCB ingredients due to the strong formation of sugar networks which requires higher penetration forces. Related results can be found in the development of cereal and granola bars prepared using sucrose alternatives (Sethupathy et al 2020;Torres et al, 2011;Yadav and Bhatnagar, 2015). In this study, increasing sweeteners caused the cereal bar to have a soft and sticky texture because of the hygroscopic nature of polysaccharides that results in absorption of moisture (Shourideh et al, 2012).…”

“…The addition of these sweeteners can affect the solid cohesion of HCB ingredients due to the strong formation of sugar networks which requires higher penetration forces. Related results can be found in the development of cereal and granola bars prepared using sucrose alternatives ( Sethupathy et al. 2020 ; Torres et al., 2011 ; Yadav and Bhatnagar, 2015 ).…”

Matrix‐dependent oral processing, oro‐sensory perception, and glycemic index of chocolate bars

“…Chocolate bars with matrix variations were procured from the local supermarket at Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu, India. Besides, a chocolate bar with barley and peanut (G) was prepared using barley flakes, groundnut bits, and chocolate syrup (Sethupathy, Suriyamoorthy, et al 2020). Table 1 depicts the proximate composition of chocolate bars with different matrices.…”

Use of Underexploited Flours for the Reduction of Glycaemic Index of Gluten-Free Biscuits: Physicochemical and Sensory Characterization

“…A low GI diet can be helpful in reducing the risk of developing type II diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular disease, and some cancers (Garsetti et al, 2005;Takao et al, 2016). Nowadays, numerous studies are aimed at the investigation or reduction of GI of pasta, bread, and other bakery products (Brennan & Samyue, 2004;Di Cairano et al, 2021;Lal et al, 2021;Scazzina et al, 2013;Sethupathy et al, 2020;Trevisan et al, 2019). Celiac disease is associated with high incidence of type I diabetes; therefore, it is important to maintain a good glycaemic control whilst adhering to the GF diet (Berti et al, 2004).…”