Content uploaded by Pablo D Ribotta
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Pablo D Ribotta
Content may be subject to copyright.
Eur Food Res Technol (2007) 225: 1–7
DOI 10.1007/s00217-006-0374-1
ORIGINAL PAPER
Gabriela N. Barrera · Gabriela T. P
´
erez ·
Pablo D. Ribotta · Alberto E. Le
´
on
Influence of damaged starch on cookie and bread-making quality
Received: 21 February 2006 / Revised: 28 April 2006 / Accepted: 8 May 2006 / Published online: 1 August 2006
C
Springer-Verlag 2006
Abstract In this study two wheat and one triticale cultivars
were milled in a disc mill to obtain different levels of dam-
aged starch. The effects of the damaged starch content on
physicochemical flour tests and cookie and bread-making
quality were analyzed. The grain milling conditions in disc
mill and grain hardness influenced the amount of dam-
aged starch. The solvent absorption of flours, as measured
by Solvent Retention Capacity Profile (SRC) and Alka-
line Water Retention Capacity (AWRC), was significantly
incremented by the damaged starch content. There was a
consistent loss in cookie quality as the damaged starch con-
tent increased. In spite of the fact that the proteins were not
affected by flour milling, bread quality decreased as the
damaged starch content increased.
Keywords Damaged starch
.
Bread
.
Cookie
.
Wheat
.
Triticale
Introduction
During wheat milling a portion of the starch granules sus-
tains mechanical damage. The level of the damage depends
on wheat hardness and milling technique. Hard wheat flour
is typically used for yeast-leavened pan breads, whereas
soft wheat flour is used for pastries, cookies, and cakes [1].
G. N. Barrera · P. D. Ribotta · A. E. Le
´
on (
)
Agencia C
´
ordoba Ciencia, Centro de Excelencia en Productos y
Procesos de C
´
ordoba (CEPROCOR),
5164 Santa Mar
´
ıa de Punilla, C
´
ordoba, Argentine
e-mail: aeleon@agro.uncor.edu
Tel.: +54-351-4334103
Fax: +54-351-4334118
G. T. P
´
erez · P. D. Ribotta · A. E. Le
´
on
Facultad de Ciencias Agropecuarias, Universidad Nacional de
C
´
ordoba,
CC 509, 5000 C
´
ordoba, Argentine
G. T. P
´
erez · P. D. Ribotta · A. E. Le
´
on
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cient
´
ıficas y Tecnol
´
ogicas
(CONICET),
Buenos Aires, Argentine
Hard wheat is more difficult to reduce to flour-sized parti-
cles; therefore, hard wheat flour has a larger mean particle
size than that of soft wheat flour.
Hard wheat produces a higher proportion of damaged
starch during the milling process. In turn, damaged starch
causes a higher water absorption capacity and is more read-
ily hydrolyzed by α-amylase. In formulas containing lit-
tle or no added sugar, damaged starch levels should be
high enough for good yeast gas production to occur, but
not so high that dough handling problems are encountered
[2, 3].
Amylase activity also leads to dextrins, which have an im-
portant effect on water-holding ability and porosity of the
dough, as well as on bread softness, an excessive dextrin
production is observed and sticky dough is obtained. The
rheological properties of the dough are slightly modified
by amylolytic consumption of damaged starch. Damaged
starch has a large hydration capacity and its disappearance
leads to a decreasing dough consistency. Consequently, al-
though the production of oligosaccharides represents the
positive aspect of amylolytic activity, the negative effect of
damaged starch consumption on the rheological properties
of dough should not be neglected.
Soft wheat flours are used for cookies. Predictive cookie
quality parameters are related to cookie size: diameter and
the ratio between the width and height. Flours that produce
larger diameter and lower height cookies are considered to
have better quality. Another aspect of cookie test baking is
the cracking that occurs on the top surface of the cookie
referred to as cookie top grain. Good top grain (many sur-
face cracks) results from recrystallization of sucrose at the
cookie surface during baking [4].
In soft wheat products, especially in cookies and cakes,
high levels of damaged starch are detrimental to quality.
Gaines et al. [5] reported that damaged starch contributed
to reduce the cookie size when flours from three soft wheats
were evaluated. Donelson and Gaines [6] observed that the
cookie diameter was negatively affected by damaged starch
level of reconstituted flours from hard and soft wheat. In
a previous work we studied the effect of damaged starch
content on cookie quality elaborated with triticale flour
2
obtained from six different tempering conditions, however,
a narrow range of damaged starch level was obtained [7].
There have been numerous studies about damaged starch,
but the effect of damaged starch on baking quality has been
evaluated using reconstitution procedures, flours with a nar-
row range of damaged starch or flours obtained from sev-
eral wheat cultivars with different degrees of hardness, and
consequently, with different damaged starch and protein
levels, where the quality of the final products was strongly
influenced, not only by the damaged starch level but also
by the flour composition.
The more important factor in baking quality is the gluten
characteristics of dough. Strong dough with an extensive
gluten network is suitable for bread making [8]. In contrast,
weak dough without an extensive gluten network is best for
cookies and cakes [9]. For this reason the effect of damaged
starch on flour quality is difficult to identify independently
of protein influence, so we think that it is important to
clarify damaged starch effects on baking quality limiting
protein influence.
In this study two wheat and one triticale flours were re-
milled to obtain different levels of damaged starch without
changing the quality and quantity of protein. The aim of
this work was to study the effects of the damaged starch
content on physicochemicalflour tests and cookie and bread
making quality.
Materials and methods
Samples
Two wheat cultivars, Klein Don Enrique and Baguette,
and one triticale cultivar, Tat
´
u, were used. Tat
´
uwas
grown in mid-level fertility soils at Campo Escuela de
la Facultad de Ciencias Agropecuarias, Universidad Na-
cional de C
´
ordoba, Argentine. Baguette and Klein Don
Enrique were provided by the Instituto Nacional de
Tecnolog
´
ıa Agropecuaria (INTA), Estaci
´
on Experimental
Marcos Ju
´
arez, C
´
ordoba, Argentine.
The kernels were milled to 58 ±2% flour yield on a 4-
roller laboratory mill (Agromatic AG AQC 109, Laupen,
Switzerland). Then each of those three flours was inten-
tionally re-milled in a Whisper Series Bench Top disc mill
(Rocklabs, Auckland, New Zeland). Wheat flours were re-
milled for 0, 2.0, and 5.0 min and triticale flour was re-
milled for 0, 3.5, and 7.0 min. The re-milling times were
chosen according to a previous analysis in order to obtain
three flours of each cultivar with low, medium and high
damaged starch levels. Moisture was determined by the
AACC 44-19 standard method [10].
Grain hardness
Grain hardness was determined by the Particle Size Index
(PSI), following the AACC 55-30 method [10], using the
Agromatic AG 109 mill (Laupen, Switzerland). The result
was calculated as the relative weight of sieved flour ×100,
and compared with a table to appoint the relative hardness.
Determinations were made in duplicate.
Protein
The nitrogen content was determined by the AACC 46-13
Micro Kjeldhal Method modified with boric acid [10]. The
sample was digested in a Technicon II digestor (Dublin,
Ireland), for four hours, then, the distillation was done in
a VELP Scientifica UDK126A unit of distillation (Milan,
Italy), the nitrogen was collected in a boric acid solution and
the crude protein was calculated N × 5.7. Determinations
were made in triplicate.
Damaged starch
The content of damaged starch was determined accord-
ing to the AACC 76-30A method [10]. A fungal enzyme
from Aspergillus oryzae (A6211, Sigma Chemical Co., St.
Louis, MO, USA) was used. Determinations were made in
triplicate.
Determination of flour quality
Alkaline water retention capacity (AWRC) was determined
according to the AACC 56-10 method [10]. Flour (1 g)
was suspended in 5 ml of 8.4 g l
−1
NaHCO
3
, hydrated for
20 min and centrifuged at 1000 ×g for 15 min at room
temperature. The sediment obtained was weighed and the
AWRC was calculated.
Sodium dodecyl sulfate sedimentation index (SDS-SI)
values were determined using 1 g of flour moistened with
8 ml of Coomassie Blue solution in a 25 ml cylinder. The
sample was left to stand for 3 min, 40 s; and vortexed for
5 s; then, left to stand for 1 min, 55 s; and vortexed again.
SDS and lactic acid (12 ml) were added immediately and
agitated for 1 min in a horizontal agitator. The resulting
suspension was left to stand 14 min, and the volume of
moistened flour was measured. Results were expressed in
cubic centimeters [11].
Solvent retention capacity profile (SRC) was obtained
according to the AACC 56-11 method [10]. White flour
samples (5 g) were suspended with 25 g of water, 500 g l
−1
sucrose, 50 g l
−1
sodium carbonate and 50 g l
−1
lactic
acid. The samples were hydrated for 20 min and cen-
trifuged at 1000 ×g for 15 min. Each precipitate obtained
was weighed and the SRC for each solvent was calculated
according to the following equation (Gaines, personal com-
munication):
% SRC =
PW
FW
×
86
100 − %M
−1
×100
PW is the precipitate weight; FW the flour weight; %M
the flour moisture content. Determinations were made in
triplicate.
3
Preparation of cookies
Cookies were prepared according to Le
´
on et al. [12]. The in-
gredients used were: flour (45 g); caster sugar (27 g); short-
ening (20 g); powdered milk (2.25 g); NaHCO
3
(0.50 g);
NaCl (0.42 g) and 8.5 ml of water. Shortening, sugar and
water were mixed to form a creamy butter. The rest of the
other ingredients were added and the dough was kneaded
for 5 min. The ingredients were mixed in a spiral arm mixer
(Philips HR 1495, Argentine). Baking was performed for
10 min at 200
◦
C in a forced convection oven (Continental
2001, Brazil) equipped with a temperature controller. Six
cookies were obtained by batch and 4 cookies (more ho-
mogeneous) were selected to determine cookie factor. To
determine cookie quality the term cookie factor was intro-
duced as the ratio between the width and height of four
cookies taken at random. The higher value was correlated
to better quality. Cookie production was made in duplicate.
Baking procedure
The recipe and bread making process followed here are
those currently employed in our country in the prepara-
tion of bread. The dough formulation used in this study
comprised: 1 kg wheat flour, 30 g compressed yeast, 18 g
sodium chloride, 2 g sodium propionate, 0.15 g ascorbic
acid, and 600 ml water. The water addition was based on
a farinograph test using the 500 BU line. The ingredients
were mixed in an Argental L-20 mixer (Argental, Santa
Fe, Argentine). Yeast and salt were previously dissolved in
water and the remaining ingredients were added as solids.
The resulting dough was allowed to rest for 15 min in a fer-
mentation cabinet at 30
◦
C and 70% RH and, then, the bulk
dough was sheeted in a Mi-Pan vf roller (Mi-Pan, C
´
ordoba,
Argentine) containing two rolls of 50 cm ×12.7 cm. The
dough was then divided in 80 g pieces and molded into a
loaf shape (Braesi MB 350, Brazil). Dough pieces were im-
mediately proofed at 30
◦
C (96% RH) up to maximum vol-
ume increment (about 90 min) [13] and baked at 200
◦
Cfor
18 min. Bread-making production was made in duplicate.
Bread properties
Bread volume: Bread loaf specific volumes were deter-
mined by rapeseed displacement and weight, 4 h after
baking. Form ratio was measured as height/width in
each loaf. Determinations were made in duplicate.
Texture of crumb: Three bread pieces were cut into 2 slices
(2.5 cm thick) and the ends were discarded. Each slice
was subjected to a compression test in a TA-XT2i
texturometer (Stable Microsystems, Surrey, UK), un-
der the following conditions: compression cell 5 kg;
crosshead speed, 100 mm min
−1
; maximum deforma-
tion, 40%; grip dimension, 3.6 cm. The hardness of the
crumb was reported as the force required to compress
samples to 25% of their original width. Six slices were
analyzed per point, and average values were reported.
Determinations were made in duplicate.
Wet gluten
Wet gluten balls from wheat and triticale flours were
obtained by gluten hand-washing method following the
AACC standard method 38-10 [10]. Gluten balls were made
in duplicate.
Protein extraction and electrophoresis
Proteins were extracted with a buffer solution (flour:liquid
1:30) (pH 6.8) containing 0.063 M Tris–HCl, 20 g l
−1
SDS,
100gl
−1
glycerol, and 0.1 g l
−1
bromophenol blue, with-
out 2-mercaptoethanol [14]. A multistacking SDS-PAGE
procedure was used to determine the size distribution of
polymeric proteins under nonreducing conditions. Three
stacking gels (pH 6.8) of 40 g l
−1
T, 27 g l
−1
C; 60 g l
−1
T, 27 g l
−1
C;80gl
−1
,27gl
−1
C were laid on top of a
120gl
−1
T,27gl
−1
C resolving gel [15].
Gels were analyzed by densitometry in an Image Master
VDS (Pharmacia Biotech Inc., Uppsala, Sweden).
Statistical analysis
Results were expressed as mean values ±SD. The data
were statistically treated by analysis of variance, the means
were compared by the LSD Fisher test at a significance
level of 0.05, and the relationships between measured pa-
rameters were assessed by Pearson’s test, in all cases using
the INFOSTAT statistical software (Facultad de Ciencias
Agropecuarias, UNC, Argentine).
Results and discussion
In order to obtain wheat and triticale flours with different
levels of damaged starch, the samples were re-milled at
different periods of time in a disc mill, consequently, the
damaged starch content increased with the milling time for
each sample. The protein content did not show significant
differences between different milling times (Table 1). Both
wheat cultivars, Baguette and Klein Don Enrique, showed
higher grain hardness and damaged starch levels than triti-
cale cultivar Tat
´
u because soft grain offered a lower resis-
tance to milling and the flour obtained had a lower content
of damaged starch.
Solvent retention capacity (SRC) establishes a practical
flour quality and functionality profile useful for predicting
baking performance [10]. The lactic acid SRC is associated
with glutenin characteristic, sodium carbonate SRC with
levels of damaged starch and sucrose SRC with pentosan
and gliadin characteristics; water SRC is influenced by all
the flour constituents [16].
4
Table 1 Particle size index
(PSI), damaged starch, protein
content and wet gluten of flour
samples
PSI (%) Disc mill time (min) Damaged starch (%)
a
Protein (%)
a
Wet gluten (%)
Baguette
15.3 ±0.2 0.0 9.3 ±0.9 b 11.6 ±0.1 b 30.7 ±1.8 a,b
Hard 2.0 14.7 ±1.1 e 11.9 ±0.5 b 28.9 ±0.5 a
5.0 17.2 ±0.6 f 11.7 ±0.2 b 28.7 ±0.2 a
Klein Don Enrique
21.2 ±0.8 0.0 8.4 ±0.3 b 14.3 ±0.2 c 32.9 ±0.3 c,d
Medium soft 2.0 12.8 ±0.6 d 14.1 ±0.3 c 33.6 ±2.5 d
5.0 17.7 ±1.0 f 13.9 ±0.4 c 32.6 ±0.7 c,d
Tat
´
u
25.6 ±0.1 0.0 6.1 ±0.2 a 9.7 ±0.6 a nd
Soft 3.5 10.4 ±0.6 c 10.0 ±0.4 a nd
7.0 14.0 ±0.6 e 9.8 ±0.3 a nd
The values are the mean of three
measurements with the standard
deviation. Values followed by
different letters are significantly
different (p<0.05)
nd, no development
a
Expressed in dry- weight of
flour
Table 2 Physicochemical tests of flour samples
Sample (min) AWRC (%) H
2
OSRC(%) Na
2
CO
3
SRC (%) Sucrose SRC (%) Lactic SRC (%) SDS-SI (cm
3
)
Baguette (0) 65.6 ±2.2 b 67.4 ±0.4 c 78.7 ±0.1 b 86.3 ±0.5 a 109.9 ±1.0 d 10.7 ±0.3 a
Baguette (2) 76.1 ±1.2 c 75.6 ±0.2 f 92.3 ±1.7 d 100.1 ±0.1 b 125.0 ±1.0 f 9.8 ±0.3 b
Baguette (5) 79.7 ±1.5 d 79.3 ±0.2 g 99.0 ±0.2 e 106.5 ±0.5 c,d 126.6 ±1.9 f 9.4 ±0.1 c,d
Klein DE (0) 67.3 ±1.6 b 65.0 ±0.1 b 78.1 ±0.9 b 90.6 ±1.1 a 102.5 ±0.4 c 9.3 ±0.1 a
Klein DE (2) 73.9 ±0.8 c 72.4 ±0.6 e 90.5 ±0.0 c 102.3 ±0.1 b,c 116.1 ±2.3 e 11.4 ±0.7 b,c
Klein DE (5) 85.4 ±0.5 e 83.9 ±1.2 h 109.6 ±0.4 f 121.7 ±0.4 e 132.6 ±2.1 g 13.9 ±0.6 e
Tat
´
u (0) 63.0 ±0.4 a 60.9 ±0.5 a 72.8 ±1.0 a 88.2 ±1.1 a 77.9 ±0.9 a 8.6 ±0.1 a
Tat
´
u (3.5) 82.0 ±1.3 d 70.3 ±0.6 d 99.0 ±
0.0 e 107.5 ±0.6 d 89.5 ±1.5 b 7.3 ±0.4 d
Tat
´
u (7) 92.9 ±2.8 f 78.6 ±1.2 g 113.0 ±0.3 g 124.4 ±6.2 e 100.9 ±1.7 c 7.0 ±0.5 e
The values are the mean of three measurements with the standard deviation. Values followed by different letters are significantly different at
p<0.05
Water, carbonate, sucrose, and lactic SRC values of each
cultivar increased significantly (p<0.05) as disc mill time
increased (Table 2).
The four solvents of SRC test had high and significant
correlation with the damaged starch level (Table 3). The
correlation observed with sodium carbonate SRC and water
SRC values is expected, because these solvents measure the
relative contributions of damaged starch [16]. The correla-
tion between lactic acid SRC and damaged starch suggests
that this parameter is not only influenced by glutenin, be-
cause the higher damaged starch level increased acid lactic
retention.
AWRC is a test to select flours of good cookie qual-
ity. The flour fractions consisting of pentosans, proteins,
glycoproteins, and damaged starch is thought to be respon-
sible for the retention of alkaline water [17]. Accordingly,
AWRC values were increased with damaged starch level
(Table 2) and correlated with carbonate, sucrose and wa-
ter SRC (Table 3). Excellent cookie-baking flours produce
large cookie diameters and low AWRC values [16]. The
flours under study showed a negative correlation between
AWRC and cookie factor (Table 3) in concordance with
several authors who have found a negative correlation be-
tween AWRC and cookie quality [12, 18, 19]. Consistent
with this result, negative correlations between cookie factor
Table 3 Correlation between SRC, AWRC, damaged starch and cookie factor of flour samples
H
2
OSRC Na
2
CO
3
SRC Sucrose SRC Lactic acid SRC AWRC Damaged starch Cookie factor
Na
2
CO
3
SRC 0.90
∗∗
Sucrose SRC 0.84
∗∗
0.97
∗∗
Lactic acid SRC 0.77
∗∗
0.44 0.36
AWRC 0.83
∗∗
0.98
∗∗
0.97
∗∗
0.34
Damaged starch 0.97
∗∗
0.82
∗∗
0.75
∗∗
0.82
∗
0.72
∗∗
Cookie factor −0.70
∗∗
−0.87
∗∗
−0.87
∗∗
−0.18 −0.89
∗∗
−0.67
∗∗
Protein 0.19 −0.05 −0.06 0.58
∗
−0.10 0.26 0.21
∗
Significant at p ≤0.05
∗∗
Significant at p ≤0.01
5
Fig. 1 Cookies elaborated with
Baguette, Klein Don Enrique
and Tat
´
u flour containing
different levels of damaged
starch. A Lower level. B Middle
level. C Higher level
with sodium carbonate, sucrose and water SRC were ob-
served (Table 3). Guttieri et al. [20] also found that cookie
diameter and top grain score correlated negatively with
sodium carbonate, sucrose, and lactic SRC.
AWRC values and cookie factor were affected by the
damaged starch level. The cookie diameter dramatically
decreased with the higher level of damaged starch in
both wheat and triticale flours (Fig. 1) because damaged
starch absorbs more water than does undamaged starch.
These results were in agreement with other authors [5, 6]
who demonstrated that increased damaged starch decreases
cookie diameter. In a previous work [7], we found corre-
lation between damaged starch content and cookie factor
(r =−0.52) when flours obtained from triticale with six
different tempering conditions were analyzed.
Good cookie and cracker flours hold water poorly [21].
The main hydrophilic components of a cookie formula are
flour and sugar. Lower water absorption by flour provokes
higher water absorbption by sugar that increments syrup
and decreases dough viscosity during baking; consequently
dough could spread farther producing larger diameter cook-
ies [22]. Flours with excessive water retention require in-
creased baking times and increased energy costs in bakeries
[20].
The best cookie factor was obtained from Baguette flour
(Table 4) without disc mill time (Baguette 0 min), but it did
not show the least damaged starch content. This fact evi-
denced the contribution of other flour components as pro-
tein in cookie quality. The influence of protein quality on
cookie quality parameters has been studied. The protein to
gluten formation, gliadin and glutenin, are functional dur-
ing cookie baking, even though little, if any, of the gluten
Table 4 The quality parameters of cookie and bread samples
Specific Crumb
Sample (min) Cookie factor volume (cm
3
/g) hardness (g)
Baguette (0) 6.4 ±0.0 g 3.29 ±0.03 e 542 ±31 a,b
Baguette (2) 5.1 ±0.1 d 2.68 ±0.07 d 859 ±56 c
Baguette (5) 4.6 ±0.0 b,c 2.36 ±0.02 a 890 ±71 c
Klein DE (0) 5.9 ±0.2 f 3.52 ±0.09 f 567 ±16 a,b
Klein DE (2) 4.9 ±0.1 c,d 3.01 ±0.04 d 854 ±70 c
Klein DE (5) 4.5 ±0.3 b 2.55 ±0.05 b 1333 ±68 e
Tat
´
u (0) 5.5 ±0.1 e 3.86 ±0.09 f 501 ±43 a
Tat
´
u (3.5) 4.3 ±0.3 a,b 3.36 ±0.05 e 599 ±19 b
Tat
´
u (7) 4.1 ±0.1 a 2.55 ±0.05 b 1201 ±62 d
The values are the mean of three measurements with the standard de-
viation. Values followed by different letters are significantly different
at p<0.05
6
Fig. 2 Breads elaborated with
Baguette A–C, Klein Don
Enrique D–F and Tat
´
u G–I flour
containing different levels of
damaged starch. A, D, G Lower
level. B, E, H Middle level. C,
F, I Higher level
network is produced [9]. Bettge et al. [23] found that alveo-
graph deformation work (W), a measure of gluten strength,
was negatively correlated with the sugar snap cookie diam-
eter; however, our results did not show correlation between
cookie factor and protein content, lactic SRC, or SDS-SI.
The baking quality of wheat and triticale flours with dif-
ferent levels of damaged starch were evaluated (Fig. 2). The
specific volume and the damaged starch level were strongly
negatively correlated (Table 5). It is known that a high level
of damaged starch reduces baking performance [24, 25];
however, SDS-SI, and wet gluten were independent of the
damaged starch level (Table 5).
The effect of damaged starch on bread crumb hardness is
shown in Table 4. The data showed an inverse relationship
between bread loaf volume and crumb hardness (Table 5),
probably because more entanglements and interactions oc-
cur between the more densely packed polymers in samples
derived from low-volume breads.
Table 5 Correlations between damaged starch, flour protein, SDS-
SI, wet gluten, bread volume and crumb hardness of flour samples
Damaged
starch
Protein SDS-SI Wet
gluten
Bread
volume
Damaged starch 1
Protein 0.33 1
SDS-SI 0.39 0.62
∗∗
1
Wet Gluten −0.29 0.63
∗∗
0.40 1
Bread volume −0.95
∗∗
−0.19 −0.28 0.52 1
Hardness 0.82
∗∗
0.44 0.35 0.12 −0.81
∗∗
∗
Significant at p ≤0.05
∗∗
Significant at p ≤0.01
The potential protein alteration in flour during milling
in disc mill was analyzed by means of wet gluten and
multistacking gel electrophoresis. Wet gluten content did
not show significant differences between different milling
times for each flour (Table 1). SDS-soluble protein ag-
gregates extracted from the flour samples were separated
in four fractions (4, 6, 8 and 12% of polyacrilamide) on
the basis of their migration in a multistacking polyacry-
lamide gel. Densitometric analysis did not show significant
differences (p>0.05) among the electrophoretic patterns
corresponding to samples milled for different periods of
time. These results evidence that gluten protein function-
ality was not affected by milling time in disc mill and that
gluten proteins were able to form aggregates stabilized by
disulfide bonds. Consequently, the damaged starch increase
was responsible for the negative effect on loaf volume. This
effect might be explained by the competence for the water
between damaged starch and protein that prevents optimum
gluten formation during mixing, although another plausible
explanation could be that damaged starch increments initial
flour absorption and that after starch degradation (via en-
zymatic hydrolysis), dough consistence decreases, which
in turns causes loss of gas-retention capacity.
Conclusions
Several investigations were made in this subject; gener-
ally, researchers have utilized flours with different damaged
starch content, obtained from reconstitution procedures or
several wheat cultivars with different degrees of hardness.
The aim of this work was to obtain flours with different
damaged starch levels from each cultivar.
7
This study confirmed the influence of damaged starch
content on flour quality. The degree of SRC and IRAA
solvent absorption of wheat and triticale flours were signif-
icantly incremented by damaged starch content and cookie
quality decreased as a consequence of damaged starch con-
tent increment.
Damaged starch reduced baking performance. Two pos-
sible explanations were suggested: (i) damaged starch
increases initial water absorption and prevents optimum
gluten formation during mixing; (ii) dough consistency de-
creases and loses gas-retention capacity after starch degra-
dation during the fermentation phase.
Damaged starch content should be a parameter of rele-
vance to optimize the process of cookie and bread manu-
facture.
Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Sebastian
Arnulphi for the baking test, the Laboratorio de Idiomas (FCA-UNC)
for providing useful suggestions to improve the English in this
paper, and both the Agencia C
´
ordoba Ciencia SE (ACC-SE) and
the Agencia Nacional de Promoci
´
on Cient
´
ıfica y Tecnol
´
ogica
(ANPCyT) for financial support.
References
1. Hoseney RC (1994) Principles of cereal science and technology,
2nd edn. American Association of Cereal Chemists, St Paul,
MN, pp 125–145
2. Bushuk W, Scanlon M (1993) In: Kamel B, Stauffer C (eds)
Advancesin baking technology. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 1–
19
3. Bettge A, Rubenthaler G, Pomeranz Y (1989) Cereal Chem
66:81–86
4. Doescher L, Hoseney RC (1985) Cereal Chem 62:263–266
5. Gaines C, Donelson J, Finney J (1988) Cereal Chem 65:384–
389
6. Donelson J, Gaines C (1988) Cereal Chem 75:660–664
7. Torri C, Ribotta P, Morcillo M, Rubiolo OJ, P
´
erez GT, Le
´
on AE
(2003) Agriscientia 20:3–8
8. Pomeranz Y (1988) In: Pomeranz Y (ed) Wheat: chemistry and
technology. American Association of Cereal Chemists, St Paul,
MN, pp. 219–370
9. Gaines C (1990) Cereal Chem 67:73–77
10. American Association of Cereal Chemists (2000) Approved
methods of the AACC. American Association of Cereal Chem-
istry, St. Paul, MN
11. Dick J, Quick J (1983) Cereal Chem 60:315–318
12. Le
´
on AE, Rubiolo OJ, A
˜
n
´
on MC (1996) Cereal Chem 73:779–
784
13. Armero E, Collar C (1998) J Cereal Sci 28:165–174
14. Ng P, Bushuk W (1987) Cereal Chem 64:324–327
15. Ribotta P, Le
´
on AE, A
˜
n
´
on MC (2001) J Agric Food Chem
49:913–918
16. Gaines C (2000) Cereal Foods World 45:303–306
17. Yamazaki W, Lord D (1988) In: Pomeranz Y (ed) Wheat: chem-
istry and technology. American Association of Cereal Chemists,
St Paul, MN, pp 743–776
18. Kisell L, Lorenz K (1976) Cereal Chem 52:638–649
19. Abboud A, Hoseney RC, Rubenthaler G (1985) Cereal Chem
62:124–129
20. Guttieri MJ, Bowen D, Gannon D, O’Brien K, Souza E (2001)
Crop Sci 41:1054–1061
21. Faridi H, Gaines C, Finney P (1994) In: Bushuk W, Rasper V
(eds) Wheat: production, properties, and quality. Chapman &
Hall, Glasgow, pp 154–168
22. Slade L, Levine H (1994) In: Faridi H (ed) The science of
cookie and cracker production. Chapman & Hall/AVI, NewYork,
pp. 23–141
23. Bettge A, Morris C, Greenblatt G (1995) Euphytica 86:65–72
24. Tipples K (1969) Baker’s Dig 43:28–32
25. Dexter J, Preston K, Tweed A, Kilborn R, Tipples K (1985)
Cereal Foods World 30:511–514
