Search

To elevate dietary fibre content in wheat bread, two additions of barley flour were tested (30 % and 50 %), and further 5 % or 10 % of chia or teff wholemeals. Chia elevated dietary fibre content more effectively than teff did (up to 6.41 % and 4.29 %, respectively). Non‑gluten nature of proteins in non‑traditional raw materials also affected farinograph, amylograph and mixolab proof results. Water absorption increased about 10 % in total, especially owing to teff presence in composite flour. All three alternative crops decelerated dough development and prolonged its stability, but dough softening degree depended on their combination. Higher water absorption was reflected in viscosity rise during amylograph testing. Using mixolab equipment, significantly more accurate differentiation of tested composites was reached, both in phase of dough kneading and registration of viscosity during heating and cooling. Contrary to this, any statistically verifiable difference was observed between chia or teff wholemeal variants from white of dark seeds. By variance analysis, some rheological parameters (dough softening degree, torque point C5, mixolab energy) together with specific bread volume were identified as principal for samples distinguishing. In terms of flour and bread quality, barley flour portion had a prevailing effect for chia tri‑composites. Reversely, quality of flour blends containing teff was dependent on both barley flour and teff wholemeal portion and type.

Wheat flour substitution by barley one led to shortening of fermentation and leavening times (about 14–57% and 35–83%, respectively) as well as to lessening of dough volumes (about 25–75%), based on lowered protein quality (Zeleny value). Addition of barley flour affected specific bread volume; diminishing for wheat-barley blends 70:30 and 50:50 reached 30% and 43%, respectively. Volume of bread prepared from wheat-barley blend 70:30 enhanced by dehulled hemp wholemeal was the highest within the tested tri-composites set, achieving 130% of wheat-barley control; other hemp products caused the parameter decrease (from 8 to 33%). Within a group of bakery products containing 50% of barley flour, hulled hemp wholemeal partially supressed negative effect of barley flour – specific bread volumes increased about ca 15%. Commercial fine hemp flour samples demonstrated a reversal influence – its addition resulted into lower buns size than wheat-barley control (about 3–34%). Between wheat flour and both groups of flour tri-composites, PCA confirmed differences in dough and bread technological quality. Specific bread volume could be predicted according to maturograph dough elasticity, dough or bread OTG volumes.

Hemp flour composition (20–30% proteins, 7–13% fat and more than 40% saccharides) is a precondition for its usage into non-traditional cereal products. Corresponding to the fact, that hemp proteins are represented mostly by edestin, a low-molecular globulin, technological behaviour of composites containing 5–20% of hemp flour is basically different. The effect was clearly reflected in specific bread volume decrease, comparing standard wheat bread vs. wheat-hemp one. Sensorial profile of such fortified product depends on hemp sample origin, the better one was observed for dehulled wholemeal hemp flour addition. Image analysis of black-white bread cut prints revealed increasing pore densities (up to about 74%) at reversely diminishing mean cell areas (up to about 31%) for bread altered by hulled wholemeal hemp flour. Comparing to wheat standard W2, crumb appearance of bread enhanced by 5% and 20% of dehulled hemp wholemeal was described by conversely lower cell density (11 and 9 vs. 13 pores per cm2) with verifiably larger cells (3.13 a 4.25 mm2 against 2.35 mm2). Specific bread volume and crumb penetration were significantly correlated to both cell density (r −0.69 and −0.65, respectively; P = 99.9 %) and to cell mean area (0.79 and 0.69, respectively; P = 99.9 %).