| Literature DB >> 35885287 |
Laura Roman1,2, Mitchell R Walker3, Nicole Detlor4, Janice Best4, Mario M Martinez1,2.
Abstract
Drum-drying results in pregelatinized starch with relatively low starch fragmentation and a great ability to absorb water and swell at room temperature. However, the effect of the degree of cold particle swelling and the thickening potential of drum-dried starch on its suitability as oil replacer in low-fat oil-in-water emulsions has received little attention. In this work, the potential of three pregelatinized drum-dried starches with almost identical molecular structure (as measured by size exclusion chromatography) and Water Binding Capacity (WBC), but different swelling behavior, was investigated to replace up to 60% oil in a mayonnaise-like emulsion system. The microstructure, stability, and rheology of the oil-in-water emulsions were noticeably affected by the substitution of oil with a pregelatinized drum-dried starch paste. Specifically, reduced-fat emulsions presented smaller droplet-size, a higher consistency index and increased emulsion stability, especially against freeze-thaw cycles, compared to the control full-fat mayonnaise. Importantly, the differences in cold swelling behavior (rather than simply assessing WBC) greatly influenced the consistency index and stability of low-fat emulsions, and results showed that drum-dried starch particles with high swelling potential perform better as oil replacers.Entities:
Keywords: amylose; clean-label; mayonnaise; rapid visco analyzer; reduced-fat; rheology; stability
Year: 2022 PMID: 35885287 PMCID: PMC9318365 DOI: 10.3390/foods11142044
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Figure 1(a) Size exclusion chromatogram showing the normalized refractive index (RI) signal versus elution time for whole (branched) starch molecules, where two distinct peaks are observed corresponding to amylopectin (left) and amylose (right) molecules. The molar mass (g/mol) for amylopectin molecules is shown at the secondary axis. (b) Size exclusion chromatograms of debranched starch showing the unit chain length distribution of wheat starch samples. DP indicates degree of polymerization.
Composition of oil-in-water emulsions based on the weight of the ingredients used in grams. Composition are based on 200 g of total emulsion formulation.
| Ingredient | Full Fat (Control) | 30% Reduced Fat | 60% Reduced Fat |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vegetable Oil | 130.0 | 91.0 | 52.0 |
| Whole liquid Egg | 62.0 | 62.0 | 62.0 |
| White Vinegar | 7.0 | 7.0 | 7.0 |
| Salt | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.9 |
| Potassium Sorbate | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 |
| Starch/water paste * | 0.0 | 39.0 | 78.0 |
* 1:5 pregelatinized wheat starch:water ratio. Pregel 1, 2 and 3 were used to prepare the reduced-fat.
Figure 2Particle size distribution (a) and sphericity (b) of particles in the pregelatinized wheat starches.
Figure 3(a) Water binding capacity (WBC, g/g) and oil absorption capacity (OAC, g/g) of wheat starches at room temperature. Different lowercase letters above each bar denote significant differences. (b) Water solubility index (WSI, g/100 g) of wheat starches at three different temperatures.
Figure 4Pasting profiles of the pregelatinized wheat starches during a temperature profile up to 95 °C. Black broken lines represent the temperature profile.
Average area, total area of droplets, number of droplets and rheological parameters for full-fat and reduced-fat oil-in-water emulsions.
| Sample | Number of Droplets | Total Area of Droplets (μm2) | Average Area (μm2) | K Index (Pa·sn) | n | Thixotropic Area (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 3976 ± 121 [a] | 27,533 ± 3042 [a] | 7.2 ± 0.5 [a] | 15.7 ± 1.2 [d] | 0.36 ± 0.02 [ab] | 4.3 ± 0.3 [d] |
| Pregel 1 (30%) | 5438 ± 621 [a] | 21,255 ± 2461 [abc] | 3.6 ± 0.1 [bc] | 22.8 ± 1.4 [c] | 0.37 ± 0.00 [ab] | 4.1 ± 0.6 [d] |
| Pregel 2 (30%) | 4817 ± 663 [a] | 14,876 ± 1356 [de] | 3.1 ± 0.4 [bc] | 22.6 ± 2.3 [c] | 0.40 ± 0.01 [a] | 3.3 ± 0.7 [d] |
| Pregel 3 (30%) | 5323 ± 896 [a] | 24,520 ± 7128 [cd] | 4.6 ± 0.6 [b] | 26.5 ± 1.2 [c] | 0.36 ± 0.01 [ab] | 5.7 ± 0.1 [c] |
| Pregel 1 (60%) | 4578 ± 361 [a] | 10,894 ± 9642 [d] | 2.2 ± 0.6 [c] | 39.2 ± 0.3 [b] | 0.32 ± 0.01 [bc] | 6.1 ± 0.6 [c] |
| Pregel 2 (60%) | 6166 ± 386 [a] | 15,681 ± 2552 [de] | 2.5 ± 0.3 [c] | 52.5 ± 1.3 [a] | 0.27 ± 0.01 [c] | 13.7 ± 0.1 [a] |
| Pregel 3 (60%) | 6012 ± 462 [a] | 19,299 ± 1688 [bc] | 3.2 ± 0.4 [bc] | 53.0 ± 2.4 [a] | 0.26 ± 0.0 [c] | 9.2 ± 0.1 [b] |
Values ± standard deviations with different letters in the same column are significantly different with p < 0.05. K index, consistency index; n, flow behavior.
Figure 5Optical microscopy images of mayonnaise like emulsions taken at 40× magnification 24 h after their making. The scale bar indicates a size of 50 μm.
Figure 6Flow behavior of control and reduced-fat (30 and 60%) oil-in-water emulsions under steady-state conditions.
Stability (%) of the oil-in-water emulsions after varying storage time conditions and freeze-thaw processing.
| Sample | Short-Term Stability | Long-Term Stability | Freeze-Thaw Stability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 93.8 ± 0.1 [b] | 77.2 ± 0.3 [f] | 51.5 ± 0.1 [g] |
| Pregel 1 (30%) | 100.0 ± 0.0 [a] | 94.4 ± 0.1 [e] | 75.8 ± 0.4 [d] |
| Pregel 2 (30%) | 100.0 ± 0.0 [a] | 96.2 ± 0.0 [c] | 75.4 ± 0.1 [e] |
| Pregel 3 (30%) | 100.0 ± 0.0 [a] | 94.8 ± 0.0 [d] | 73.3 ± 0.1 [f] |
| Pregel 1 (60%) | 100.0 ± 0.0 [a] | 99.3 ± 0.0 [b] | 92.1 ± 0.0 [b] |
| Pregel 2 (60%) | 100.0 ± 0.0 [a] | 99.5 ± 0.0 [ab] | 91.9 ± 0.1 [c] |
| Pregel 3 (60%) | 100.0 ± 0.0 [a] | 99.6 ± 0.1 [a] | 93.2 ± 0.1 [a] |
Values ± standard deviations with different letters in the same column are significantly different with p < 0.05.