| Literature DB >> 36234886 |
Ada Krawęcka1, Aldona Sobota1, Eva Ivanišová2, Ľuboš Harangozo2, Veronika Valková3, Ewelina Zielińska4, Agata Blicharz-Kania5, Beata Zdybel5, Sylwia Mildner-Szkudlarz6.
Abstract
Pasta is a good carrier for plant enrichment substances due to its popularity among consumers. The purpose of the study was to investigate the functional potential and optimize the recipe of pasta made from durum semolina with the addition of black cumin cake at the level of 5, 10, 15, 20, and 25%. The use of black cumin cake resulted in a statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05) increase in the content of protein, fat, ash, and fiber, including both the insoluble and soluble fractions. A reduction in the digestible carbohydrate content, in vitro starch hydrolysis index (HI), was observed. Pasta with a reduced glycemic index (GI) compared to the semolina control was obtained. The content of polyphenols, including flavonoids, in the cake-enriched pasta increased significantly (p ≤ 0.05), which resulted in higher antioxidant activity against DPPH. The increase in the iron content was over 2.5 times higher in the sample with the 25% addition of black cumin cake than in the control sample. The functional addition significantly (p ≤ 0.05) increased the loss of dry matter and influenced the cooking time of pasta.Entities:
Keywords: antioxidants; by-products; enriched pasta; functional food
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36234886 PMCID: PMC9573312 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27196342
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.927
Model of the experiment.
| Samples | Raw Materials | Pressure | Barrel Temp. | Extruder Output | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Semolina Durum | Black Cumin Cake | ||||
|
| 100 | 0 | 13 | 27.7 | 32.22 |
| BC5 | 95 | 5 | 13.5 | 27.5 | 30.24 |
| BC10 | 90 | 10 | 11 | 27 | 30.96 |
| BC15 | 85 | 15 | 9.5 | 27.1 | 30.96 |
| BC20 | 80 | 20 | 9.5 | 26.9 | 29.88 |
| BC25 | 75 | 25 | 9.2 | 26.9 | 28.44 |
Explanation: CON—control sample; BC—pasta with black cumin cake.
Basic chemical composition of raw material and pasta samples.
| Samples | Moisture | Protein | Fat | Ash | TDF | IDF | SDF | Digestible Carbohydrate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (%) | % d.m. | |||||||
|
| ||||||||
| Semolina durum | 9.38 b ± 0.07 | 13.41 a ± 0.02 | 0.58 a ± 0.01 | 0.94 a ± 0.01 | 4.25 a ± 0.35 | 2.22 a ± 0.3 | 2.03 a ± 0.05 | 80.82 |
| Black cumin cake | 5.88 a ± 0.14 | 24.53 b ± 1.73 | 18.38 b ± 0.15 | 5.19 b ± 0.14 | 51.90 b ± 4.9 | 48.16 b ± 7.42 | 3.53 a ± 2.52 | 0.2 |
|
| ||||||||
| CON | 5.39 a ± 0.01 | 12.76 a ± 0.1 | 0.13 a ± 0.01 | 1.00 a ± 0.02 | 5.39 a ± 0.27 | 2.37 a ± 1.15 | 3.02 a ± 0.12 | 80.72 |
| BC5 | 5.01 ab ± 0.18 | 13.46 b ± 0.17 | 0.23 a ± 0.01 | 1.23 b ± 0.02 | 7.47 b ± 0.39 | 4.14 ab ± 0.35 | 3.34 ab ± 0.04 | 77.61 |
| BC10 | 5.33 a ± 0.01 | 14.25 c ± 0.04 | 0.55 b ± 0.11 | 1.47 c ± 0.02 | 9.03 c ± 0.39 | 5.32 b ± 0.04 | 3.66 ab ± 0.43 | 74.70 |
| BC15 | 5.24 ab ± 0.09 | 15.07 d ± 0.06 | 1.66 c ± 0.14 | 1.73 d ± 0.01 | 11.12 d ± 0.11 | 7.15 c ± 0.44 | 3.97 ab ± 0.34 | 70.42 |
| BC20 | 5.31 a ± 0.05 | 15.96 e ± 0.01 | 3.65 e ± 0.02 | 2.03 e ± 0.01 | 12.92 e ± 0.21 | 8.61 c ± 0.01 | 4.31 b ± 0.19 | 65.44 |
| BC25 | 4.94 b ± 0.19 | 16.41 f ± 0.01 | 3.31 d ± 0.04 | 2.20 f ± 0.02 | 14.79 f ± 0.5 | 10.43 d ± 0.93 | 4.36 b ± 0.43 | 63.29 |
Explanation: IDF—insoluble dietary fiber; SDF—soluble dietary fiber; TDF—total dietary fiber; CON—control sample; BC—pasta with black cumin cake. Data are presented as mean (n = 3) ± standard deviation. Data value of each parameter with different superscript letter (a–f) in the columns are significantly different (Tukey test, p ≤ 0.05). *—Statistically significant differences in the raw materials were determined excluding the series of results for the pasta samples.
Chemical elements in the raw materials and pasta samples.
| Raw Material | Concentration | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cu | Zn | Mn | Fe | Cr | |
| mg/kg of d.m. | |||||
| Semolina Durum | 3.09 | 12.03 | 8.06 | 24.61 | nd |
| Black Cumin Cake | 15.41 | 44.62 | 33.47 | 210.48 | 0.96 |
|
| |||||
| CON | 4.12 | 12.37 | 7.72 | 22.83 | 0.11 |
| BC5 | 6.01 | 15.18 | 9.59 | 31.84 | 0.11 |
| BC10 | 6.13 | 16.37 | 10.88 | 39.93 | 0.21 |
| BC15 | 6.75 | 19.30 | 12.13 | 51.04 | 0.21 |
| BC20 | 6.97 | 20.80 | 13.62 | 55.00 | 0.21 |
| BC25 | 8.51 | 22.06 | 14.50 | 58.62 | 0.32 |
Explanation: CON—control sample; BC—pasta with black cumin cake; nd—not detected; d.m.—dry matter.
Total polyphenol and flavonoid content and antioxidant activity of pasta.
| Sample | Polyphenols | Flavonoids | Radical Scavenging Activity (DPPH) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
|
| 0.32 a* ± 0 | 2.20 a* ± 0 | 0.98 a* ± 0.05 | |||
| Black cumin cake | 2.93 b* ± 0.05 | 272.57 b* ± 2.47 | 3.08 b* ± 0.06 | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| CON | 0.02 aA ± 0.02 | 0.28 aB ± 0 | 15.05 ab ± 6.49 | n.d. | 1.04 aA ± 0.06 | 0.96 aA ± 0.01 |
| BC5 | 0.16 bA ± 0.06 | 0.37 aA ± 0.03 | 16.70 bc ± 1.30 | n.d. | 1.42 bA ± 0.10 | 0.96 aA ± 0.01 |
| BC10 | 0.38 cA ± 0.01 | 0.43 abA ± 0.04 | 29.77 c ± 1.62 | n.d. | 1.60 bcA ± 0.05 | 1.02 aA ± 0.03 |
| BC15 | 0.64 dA ± 0 | 0.58 cA ± 0.03 | 59.17 dB ± 1.04 | 1.06 aA ± 0.58 | 1.76 cdA ± 0.02 | 1.23 bA ± 0.01 |
| BC20 | 0.89 eA ± 0.01 | 0.62 cA ± 0.07 | 67.39 deA ± 4.48 | 14.50 bA ± 3.89 | 1.80 cdA ± 0.10 | 1.33 bA ± 0.06 |
| BC25 | 1.12 fA ± 0.02 | 0.70 cB ± 0.06 | 79.72 eA ± 4.54 | 34.17 cA ± 0.45 | 1.97 dA ± 0.03 | 1.35 bA ± 0.07 |
Explanation: CON—control sample; BC—pasta with black cumin cake. Data are presented as mean (n = 2) ± standard deviation. Values of each parameter with different uppercase superscript letters (A–B) in the rows are significantly different (Tukey’s test, p ≤ 0.05). Values of each parameter with different lowercase superscript letters (a–f) in the columns are significantly different (Tukey’s test, p ≤ 0.05). *—Statistically significant differences in the raw materials were determined excluding the series of results for the pasta samples.
Cooking quality and texture of pasta samples.
| Pasta Samples | Cooking Time | Cooking Loss | Cooking Weight Increase | F | Cutting Work (mJ) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | 5 a | 6.00 a ± 0.95 | 2.30 ab ± 0.04 | 4.56 b ± 0.34 | 0.913 d ± 0.06 |
| BC5 | 7 c | 6.67 ab ± 0.11 | 2.39 bc ± 0.03 | 3.89 a ± 0.25 | 0.778 a ± 0.04 |
| BC10 | 6′30 bc | 8.26 bc ± 0.17 | 2.52 c ± 0.01 | 4.00 a ± 0.13 | 0.799 ab ± 0.02 |
| BC15 | 6 bc | 8.25 bc ± 0.47 | 2.34 abc ± 0.12 | 4.08 ab ± 1.10 | 0.816 b ± 0.02 |
| BC20 | 5′30 ab | 8.61 c ± 0.08 | 2.27 ab ± 0.01 | 4.27 ab ± 0.15 | 0.855 c ± 0.03 |
| BC25 | 5 ab | 9.04 c ± 0.16 | 2.17 a ± 0.03 | 4.39 ab ± 0.17 | 0.878 cd ± 0.03 |
Explanation: % d.m—% of dry matter; CON—control sample; BC—pasta with black cumin cake. Data are presented as mean (n = 2) ± standard deviation for CT, CL, and WII measurements and (n = 3) for F and cutting work. Data value of each parameter with different superscript letter (a–d) in the columns are significantly different (Tukey test, p ≤ 0.05).
Hydrolysis index of starch (HI) and glycemic index (GI) of the pasta samples.
| Pasta Samples | HI (%) | GI |
|---|---|---|
| CON | 14.32 ± 0.89 a | 47.57 ± 0.49 a |
| BC5 | 12.88 ± 0.52 ab | 46.78 ± 0.29 ab |
| BC10 | 12.65 ± 0.3 ab | 46.65 ± 0.16 ab |
| BC15 | 12.44 ± 0.26 ab | 46.54 ± 0.14 ab |
| BC20 | 11.46 ± 0.1 c | 46.00 ± 0.06 c |
| BC25 | 10.8 ± 0.71 c | 45.64 ± 0.39 c |
Explanation: HI—hydrolysis index of starch; GI—glycemic index values; CON—control sample; BC—black cumin cake. Data are presented as mean (n = 2) ± standard deviation. Data values of each parameter with different superscript letters (a–c) are significantly different (Tukey’s test, p ≤ 0.05).