| Literature DB >> 31667421 |
Abbas Abedfar1, Alireza Sadeghi2.
Abstract
In this study, the dominant lactic acid bacteria present in whole wheat sourdough was isolated and identified as Lactobacillus plantarum by molecular methods, before being utilized as the starter culture in the processing of sourdough cup breads. Subsequently, the effects of sourdough fermentation time, ash content, and sugar content on bread quality attributes were investigated by response surface methodology. In terms of the independent variables, the best polynomial models were fitted for bread hardness, chewiness, specific volume, total color difference (TCD), porosity and overall acceptability (OAA). Based on statistical analysis (P < 0.05), the effect of fermentation time on hardness and TCD was significant; ash content influenced specific volume and TCD significantly. In comparison with other functions, the interaction between fermentation time and sugar content had a significant (P < 0.05) influence on bread OAA. Furthermore, a strong positive correlation was ascertained between sourdough total titratable acidity and most of the quality attributes of cup bread (especially hardness, specific volume and OAA). Accordingly, the control of sourdough fermentation conditions is influential on microbial activity and metabolites, which affect bread quality characteristics.Entities:
Keywords: Food science; Iranian cup breads; Quality characteristics; Response surface methodology; Sourdough
Year: 2019 PMID: 31667421 PMCID: PMC6812221 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02608
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
Composition of various runs of central composite design (A) and experimental data (B).
| (A) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Run | Fermentation time (h) | Sugar contents (%) | Ash contents (A, g/100 g, d.w) |
| 1 | 24.00 | 0.50 | 1.55 |
| 2 | 8.00 | 1.50 | 0.45 |
| 3 | 16.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 4 | 16.00 | 1.00 | 0.45 |
| 5 | 16.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 6 | 24.00 | 1.50 | 0.45 |
| 7 | 16.00 | 0.50 | 1.00 |
| 8 | 8.00 | 0.50 | 0.45 |
| 9 | 24.00 | 0.50 | 0.45 |
| 10 | 16.00 | 1.00 | 1.55 |
| 11 | 8.00 | 0.50 | 1.55 |
| 12 | 24.00 | 1.50 | 1.55 |
| 13 | 24.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 14 | 16.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 15 | 8.00 | 1.50 | 1.55 |
| 16 | 8.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| 17 | 16.00 | 1.50 | 1.00 |
ANOVA and regression coefficients of the linear and secondorder polynomial models for the response variables (actual values).
| Source | DF | TTA | Hardness (N) | Chewiness | Specific volume (cm3/g) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient | Sum of squares | p-Value | Coefficient | Sum of squares | p-Value | Coefficient | Sum of squares | p-Value | Coefficient | Sum of squares | p-Value | ||
| Model | 9 | 2.48 | 7.97 | <0.0001 | 23.03 | 415.76 | 0.1968 | 1941.01 | 632.2 | 0.1892 | 2.10 | 1.22 | 0.0039 |
| X1 | 1 | 0.52 | 2.72 | 0.0126 | -0.89 | 7.96 | 0.5810 | -377.43 | 142.5 | 0.0848 | 0.062 | 0.039 | 0.1486 |
| X2 | 1 | 0.14 | 0.20 | 0.4507 | -0.72 | 5.25 | 0.6529 | -20.46 | 4186.42 | 0.9164 | -0.057 | 0.032 | 0.1811 |
| X3 | 1 | 0.32 | 1.00 | 0.1023 | -0.98 | 9.66 | 0.5443 | 400.17 | 160.1 | 0.0710 | 930.01 | 864.9 | 0.8155 |
| X11 | 1 | -0.38 | 0.39 | 0.0052 | -7.78 | 162.13 | 0.0349 | -688.17 | 127.1 | 0.0999 | 0.15 | 0.062 | 0.0788 |
| X22 | 1 | 0.25 | 0.16 | 0.0369 | 1.17 | 3.64 | 0.707 | 474.17 | 603.4 | 0.2329 | -0.034 | 310.5 | 0.6601 |
| X33 | 1 | -0.80 | 1.73 | <0.0001 | -3.38 | 30.59 | 0.2941 | -331.43 | 294.3 | 0.3921 | -0.57 | 0.87 | 0.0001 |
| X12 | 1 | 0.11 | 0.094 | 0.0904 | -1.03 | 8.48 | 0.5693 | 140.14 | 157.1 | 0.5266 | -0.040 | 0.013 | 0.3837 |
| X13 | 1 | 0.21 | 0.35 | 0.0069 | 1.18 | 11.08 | 0.5169 | -332.62 | 885.5 | 0.1577 | -0.037 | 0.011 | 0.4216 |
| X23 | 1 | -0.067 | 0.036 | 0.2654 | 1.38 | 15.32 | 0.4487 | -0.58 | 2.72 | 0.9979 | -937.5 | 703.1 | 0.8333 |
| Residual | 7 | 0.17 | 166.51 | 247.7 | 0.10 | ||||||||
| Lack of fit | 5 | 0.16 | 0.1713 | 160.93 | 0.0818 | 242.6 | 0.0506 | 0.072 | 0.5883 | ||||
| Pure error | 2 | 0.012 | 5.59 | 50949.40 | 0.031 | ||||||||
| Total | 16 | 8.14 | 582.27 | 879.9 | 1.33 | ||||||||
| R2 | 0.979 | 0.7140 | 0.7187 | 0.9223 | |||||||||
| Adj- R2 | 0.952 | 0.3464 | 0.3565 | 0.8225 | |||||||||
| CV | 8.08 | 28.44 | 36.72 | 6.60 | |||||||||
Fig. 1Agarose gel electrophoresis of PCR products obtained under optimized conditions for identification of dominant LAB isolates (1500 bp). 100 bp DNA ladder (lane 2), extracted DNA from cultured cells of Lactobacillus spp. in MRS broth as positive control (lane 3), DNA extracted from single colonies of sourdough cultures (lane 4 and 5) and no DNA as negative control (lane 1).
Fig. 2Dendogram showing multiple sequence alignment of 16S rRNA gene sequences of the wheat bran sourdough of the strains.
Fig. 3Response surface plot of interactive effects of independent variables on sourdough TTA (a) and pH (b).
Fig. 4Response surface plot of interactive effects of independent variables on bread hardness (a), chewiness (b) and specific volume (c).
Fig. 5Response surface plot of interactive effects of independent variables on TCD (a), porosity (b) and OAA (c).
Correlation coefficients matrix between sourdough bread quality attributes fermented with L. plantarum.
| Parameter | TTA | pH | Hardness | Chewiness | Specific volume | TCD | Porosity | OAA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TTA | 1 | 0.921 | 0.845 | 0.732 | 0.813 | 0.762 | 0.534 | 0.896 |
| pH | 1 | 0.711 | 0.522 | 0.781 | 0.628 | 0.499 | 0.820 | |
| Hardness | 1 | 0.322 | 0.621 | 0.784 | 0.421 | 0.616 | ||
| Chewiness | 1 | 0.443 | 0.623 | 0.531 | 0.789 | |||
| Specific volume | 1 | 0.799 | 0.654 | 0.661 | ||||
| TCD | 1 | 0.510 | 0.541 | |||||
| Porosity | 1 | 0.626 | ||||||
| OAA | 1 |