The Effect of Microwave, Autoclave and Hot Air Oven Stabilized Wheat Bran Substitution on Nutritional and Sensorial Properties of Flat Breads

Abstract

Abstract:The influence of stabilized wheat bran enrichment on the nutritional and sensorial properties of leavened and unleavened flat bread was studied. Wheat bran was stabilized with three applications (hot air oven, microwave and autoclave). The stabilization methods affected the physical characteristics of bazlama (thickness, spread factor) and yufka (diameter, thickness, spread factor) samples. In bazlama samples, substitution of stabilized wheat bran (SWB) lead to significant decrease in L* and increase in a* and b* values compared to the control bazlama. While autoclave and microwave stabilization methods are the most effective methods to decrease the phytic acid content for bazlama samples, for yufka samples; autoclave stabilization is the best. The mineral content (Ca, K, Mg, Mn, P, Fe and Zn) of bazlama and yufka samples significantly (p<0.05) increased with SWB substitution. Thus, autoclave stabilization could be used for wheat bran stabilization to improve the nutritional quality of bazlama and yufka samples.

Influence of heat treatment for some wheat milling fractions on fino bread quality

“…Wherein, the HWB and HWG showed higher significant (P B 0.05) changes in crumb color values than UWB and UWG values, especially with the steady increase of their levels. These results are in agreement with the findings of of Ertaş (2016), Gajula (2017) and Wang et al (2017a, b). These changes in crumb color of FB loaves were due to the potential color of wheat germ and wheat bran and their fiber contents (Gómez et al 2012;Nandeesh et al 2011).…”

“…The increase in WA was due to the water absorption capacity of the hydrocolloids, globulin protein and fiber-rich fractions specifically, pentosans of wheat germ and wheat bran. During dough mixing, these components could compete with other dough components for water through hydrogen bonding; alter the dough WA (Cai et al 2014;Ertaş 2016). Our results showed that the WA of flour blends (FH 5-20 ) with HWB and HWG was lower than that of flour blends (FUH 5-20 ) with the UWB and UWG at the same conditions, but no significant difference (P B 0.05) was observed for most samples, as has already been observed by Wang et al (2017a, b).…”

“…Although the OAA scores of FB loaves (BH 20 ) made from 20 g/100 g HWB and 3 g/100 g HWG had the lowest scores, but they were not precisely low, they are still slightly acceptable (higher than five, the midpoint of the scale are). Ertaş (2016) fortified flat bread with the hot-air stabilized wheat bran at 10% level it gives the best sensory properties such as color/appearance, taste/flavor, and overall acceptability. In addition, Majzoobi et al (2012) found that toasted wheat germ at 5% had positive effects on flat bread taste and general acceptability.…”

“…This effect was due to the higher IDF of wheat bran and wheat germ that may compete for water with gluten and disrupts the gluten network, which decreases the bread loaf volumes. Besides, the activities of the glutathione and the lipase present in bran and germ, lead to an accumulation of predominant components, reduction in the dough cohesive molecular forces, catalyzing disulphide linkage, and decreases loaf volumes (Cai et al 2014;Ertaş 2016;Hemdane et al 2016). However, the HWB and HWG showed no significant (P B 0.05) changes in FB loaf volumes up to a level (BH 5-10 ) of 10 g/100 g. This effect was because the dry heat treatment inactivates lipase ( Table 1) and glutathione that might force gas cells to expand in a particular dimension at the lower proportion of bran (Majzoobi et al 2012;Hemdane et al 2016).…”

“…More crude fat indicates FB being more palatable, with condensed source of energy. More ash means more mineral content (Ertaş 2016).…”