| Literature DB >> 32566175 |
Erqi Guan1,2, Yuling Yang1, Jinyue Pang1, Tingjing Zhang1, Mengmeng Li1, Ke Bian1,2.
Abstract
In the present paper, the properties of different ultrafine flour samples, including particle size distribution, damaged starch content, falling number, and pasting properties, were examined. The results indicated that the particle size decreased significantly after jet milling, as the rotation speed and grinding time increased, and the damaged starch content significantly increased as the size of the flour/starch decreased; this is in contrast to the significant decrease in falling number. Significant differences in pasting temperature were observed between straight-grade flour (68.6°C) and five ultrafine flour samples (from 86.3 to 87.9°C). We also observed significant increases in peak viscosity, trough, breakdown viscosity, final viscosity, and setback as the flour particle size decreased from 43.07 µm to 25.81 µm (D50). The same parameters significantly decreased as the flour particle size decreased from 25.81 µm to 10.15 µm (D50). Correlation analysis identified a significant negative correlation between flour particle size (D50) and damaged starch content and pasting temperature, while a significant positive correlation was found with the falling number values. The results of this work may have an important impact on the quality of processed foods.Entities:
Keywords: damaged starch; particle size distribution; pasting profiles; superfine techniques; wheat flour
Year: 2020 PMID: 32566175 PMCID: PMC7300039 DOI: 10.1002/fsn3.1431
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Food Sci Nutr ISSN: 2048-7177 Impact factor: 2.863
Particle size distributions of straight‐grade flour (SGF) and ultrafine flour samples (UFS)
| Samples | Rotor speed (r/min) | Rounds of grinding | D50 (µm) |
|---|---|---|---|
| SGF | – | – | 43.07 ± 0.03a |
| UFS1 | 3,000 | Once | 25.81 ± 0.03b |
| UFS2 | 7,800 | Twice | 21.11 ± 0.06c |
| UFS3 | 10,200 | Once | 15.22 ± 0.03d |
| UFS4 | 12,600 | Three times | 12.09 ± 0.07e |
| UFS5 | 13,800 | Twice | 10.15 ± 0.05f |
Data are presented as mean±standard deviation.
Different letters in the same line indicate significant differences (p < .05).
Figure 1Scanning electron microscope (SEM) images of straight‐grade flour (SGF) and ultrafine flour samples (UFS). S, starch particle; P, protein fragment. (a) SGF, magnification 800×; (b) UFS1, magnification 800×; (c) UFS2, magnification 800×; (d) UFS3, magnification 800×; (e) UFS4, magnification 800×; (f) UFS5, magnification 800×; (g) UFS5, magnification 3,000×; and (h) UFS5, magnification 3,000×
Figure 2Damaged starch content of straight‐grade flour and ultrafine flour samples
Figure 3Falling number of straight‐grade flour and ultrafine flour samples
Pasting parameters of straight‐grade flour (SGF) and ultrafine flour samples (UFS)
| Sample | PT (°C) | PV ( RVU) | TV (RVU) | FV (RVU) | BD (RVU) | SB (RVU) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SGF | 68.55 ± 0.01e | 1582.00 ± 5.66b | 1,041.00 ± 4.24b | 2054.00 ± 5.66b | 541.00 ± 1.41b | 1,013.00 ± 1.41b |
| UFS1 | 86.25 ± 0.03d | 1782.00 ± 4.24a | 1,131.00 ± 1.41a | 2,219.00 ± 9.90a | 651.00 ± 2.83a | 1,088.00 ± 8.49a |
| UFS2 | 87.85 ± 0.01a | 1,357.00 ± 7.07c | 872.00 ± 4.24c | 1865.00 ± 1.41c | 485.00 ± 2.83c | 993.00 ± 2.83c |
| UFS3 | 87.10 ± 0.04c | 1,180.00 ± 8.49d | 762.00 ± 5.66d | 1681.00 ± 9.90d | 418.00 ± 2.83d | 919.00 ± 4.24d |
| UFS4 | 87.71 ± 0.01b | 980.00 ± 14.14e | 591.00 ± 2.83e | 1,363.00 ± 7.07e | 389.00 ± 11.31e | 772.00 ± 4.24e |
| UFS5 | 87.71 ± 0.02b | 907.00 ± 8.49f | 544.00 ± 5.66f | 1,274.00 ± 4.24f | 363.00 ± 2.83f | 730.00 ± 1.41f |
Pasting temperature (PT) refers to the temperature at which the sample viscosity begins to increase after heating. Peak viscosity (PV) is the maximum viscosity value of starch paste heated before the sample is gelatinized. Trough viscosity (TV) is the minimum viscosity value of starch paste heated during cooling after it reaches peak viscosity. Final viscosity (FV) is the viscosity value of starch paste heated at the end of the test. BD represents breakdown, which is the difference between PV and TV. SB represents setback, which is the difference between FV and TV.
Data are presented as mean±standard deviation.
Different letters in the same line indicate significant differences (p< .05).
Correlation coefficients between different parameters of flour/starch
| Property | Damaged starch (%) | Falling number (s) |
PT (°C) |
PV ( RVU) |
TV (RVU) |
BD (RVU) |
FV (RVU) |
SB (RVU) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D50 (µm) | −0.915 | 0.944 | −0.900 | 0.785 | 0.815 | 0.700 | 0.787 | 0.726 |
| Damaged starch | – | −0.967 | 0.689 | −0.923 | −0.933 | −0.879 | −0.916 | −0.872 |
| Falling number | – | – | −0.759 | 0.897 | 0.912 | 0.841 | 0.891 | 0.839 |
Represents significant differences at 0.05 level.
Represents significant differences at 0.01 level.