Choice of Cereal Raw Materials and Suitable Combinations of Additives for Sensory Quality Improvement of Pastry

Abstract

Effect of selected additives and their combinations on the sensory quality of final cereal products prepared from the mixture of flours (wheat T 650, rye T 930, and spelt) and from wheat flour T 512 was studied. The following sensory parameters were considered: shape (cambering); crust (color, thickness, hardness); crust/crumb (odor, taste); crumb (elasticity, porosity, color, hardness (resistance to bite); adhesiveness (to palate at longer chewing). It was found that sensory parameters increased after the application of the selected combinations of improving additive substances (ascorbic acid, enzymes and emulsifiers) and concentration of the enzyme preparation Lipopan 50 BG had a positive effect on sensory parameters and on the reduction of the applied amount of emulsifiers in the final product.

Keywords:

• Sensory quality
• Pastry
• Cereals
• Additives
• Emulsifiers
• Enzymes

INTRODUCTION

Milling and baking products represent the basic and essential component of the human nutrition. Although the main raw-material used for their production are cereals, especially wheat and rye, an increasing attention is paid at present to the renewed cereal — spelt (Triticum spelta L.). This cereal is a forerunner of today's wheat, which was grown already a long time ago, but due to its lower yields, it was replaced by new cultivated species.[1–3] The spelt contains in comparison with wheat more proteins, fibers, and minerals and has the higher nutrition value.[4,5] Therefore, it is a potential source of the new food products.

A modern baking process may take advantage of biotechnology in its widest sense, from the improvement of cereal grains and starter cultures by means of the recombinant DNA technology, through the use of enzymes as processing aids, and for the application of the most advanced batch and continuous fermentation technologies.[6] Recently, in the production of bread and pastry, great attention has been paid to the prolongation of the shelf-life of final products. There are growing requirements for the properties of baking products that call for the development of new improving preparations and specific additives,[7] which would beneficially influence the baking properties of flours, and thereby, the properties of final products. In this connection an important role is attributed to the application of various enzymes (proteases, oxidoreductases, amylases, hemicellulases, lipases, xylanases, etc.), emulsifiers, and ascorbic acid, which is effectively applied mainly in the combination with the anionic type of emulsifiers to improve the rheological properties of dough.[8,9,10]

In the Slovak Republic, the application of improving food preparations is regulated by the Food Codex of Slovakia in which they are indicated as the “supplementary and technologically subsidiary food substances.”[11] From among the commercial enzyme preparations, Lipopan F BG is used for the reduction of the amount of emulsifiers; Fungamyl Super MA, Gluzyme BG, Lipopan 50 BG, Fungamyl BG, Pentopan Mono BG, and Lipopan F BG are used for the structural improvement of crumb and the volume enlargement of products; Fungamyl Super MA and AMG 1000 BG, for the improvement of crumb colour; Pentopan Mono BG, Fungamyl Super MA, Lipopan 50 BG and Lipopan F BG, for the improvement of dough stability; Novamyl, for the slowing down of staling, etc.[12]

Based on the literature data[13,14,15] and on our previous experience with the application of additives (transglutaminase, fermizyme P 2),[16] the model experiment carried out at our department was aimed to extend the range of improving preparations and their combinations, as well as to select the optimum final product with favorable sensory parameters. According to rheological properties the following ratio of flours was chosen. The products were prepared: (i) from the mixture of flours (kg/100 kg of mixture, i.e., 55 % wheat T 650, 15% rye T 930, and 30% spelt) at the ratio resulting from the previous experimental practice and the additives of different concentrations, i.e., ascorbic acid (0.016%), Bakezyme BM (0.02%), emulsifiers (0.15%), Pentopan Mono BG (0.003%), Lipopan 50 BG (0.001%), and Fungamyl BG (0.00067%); (ii) from the wheat flour T 512 containing the addition of ascorbic acid (0.005%), enzyme preparation Lipopan 50 BG (0.001, 0.003, and 0,005%) and emulsifiers (0.15, 0.05, and 0.02%), all of them being used to make a proper comparison; the influence of Lipopan 50 BG on the reduction of emulsifiers was also observed. Our results which have been obtained through six trained assessors in the sensory evaluation of the following sensory parameters, namely: shape (camber), crust (color, thickness, hardness); crust/crumb (odor, taste); crumb (flexibility, porosity, color); hardness (resistance to bite); and, adhesiveness (to palate at longer chewing) are only partial ones achieved throughout the whole micro baking experiment carried out at our department.

MATERIALS

Raw Materials and Formula of the Preparation

Wheat flour T 512 and T 650, rye flour T 930, spelt flour, sour dough Enzyma-Ch (Adivit Ltd., Nitra, Slovak Republic), baker's yeast (Fala Strassbourg, France), oil, salt, saccharose (from a trade network). Enzymes: fungal α-amylase + fungal hemicellulase + glucose oxidase (Bakezyme BM), fungal lipase from Fusarium oxysporum, genetic modification of Aspergillus oryzae (Lipopan 50 BG), fungal α-amylase from Aspergillus oryzae (Fungamyl BG), 1,4-β-xylanase (pentosanase — genetic modification of Aspergillus oryzae) (Pentopan Mono BG) (Enzyma, Inc., Brno, Czech Republic). Emulsifiers: natrium and calcium salt of stearic and lactic esters – Basic SSL (E 481), Basic CSL (E 482) in the ratio of 1:1 (Propeka Trading, Ltd., Bratislava, Slovak Republic); ascorbic acid (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany).

Preparation

The composition of pastry was: flour (300 g), salt 5.7 g (1.9%), saccharose 1.5 g (0.5%), baker's yeast 12 g (4%), oil 3 g (1%), water (according to the water absorption capacity of flour up to 350 FJ).[17] Procedure: raw materials with the addition of baker's yeast, oil and additive are homogenized in a farinograph mixer for 3 minutes; the covered dough is left in a thermobox for final proofing (30°C), then divided into four parts (100 g) and shaped into loaves in an extensograph; the mass is left for 45 minutes to finish fermenting at 30°C and finally baked in the electric oven MORA 524 (11 min/230°C). Then the loaves were cooled for 1 hour, 15 minutes at ambient temperature giving a temperature of 25°C at core. Six replicates (at least) were performed for each experiment. Control pastry samples, which did not contain additives, were prepared simultaneously each series of experimentation, under identical conditions.

METHODS

The sensory evaluation of the final products was accomplished by means of the five-point hedonic scale by a six-member panel.[18,19] The assessors who passed accreditation sensory food examinations completed by certificate. They evaluated the following sensory parameters: product (shape, odor, taste); crust (color, thickness/hardness); crumb (elasticity, porosity, color, hardness = resistance to bite, and adhesive power to the palate at longer chewing). The maximum four-point value corresponded to the highest degree of evaluation of the product quality and the lowest degree of evaluation corresponded to the zero point, they expressed the essential qualitative deficiencies (Table 1). The product cambering was determined accurately by measuring the width and height (mm) by using a sliding caliper. The flat cambering refers to the too much loose dough characterized by the excessive rising; the round cambering indicates the too tough and short dough resulting in insufficient rising. The cambering ratio was achieved by dividing the height by the width. After the division of those parameters the optimum cambering of pastry was 0.65. When it increased, the pastry became more cambered and when it decreased, it was upside down.[17] The camber ratio of pastry was made only in duplicates and therefore only mean values (n = 2) are presented; the sensory scoring evaluation is indicated in mean values (n = 6); the standard deviation (SD) and the statistical differences are given with a 95% level of significance (P ≤ 0.05).[20]

Table 1 Scale of the sensory scoring evaluation of pastry.

Attribute	Characteristics
Shape/camber
4	Sufficiently cambered
3	Semicambered
2	Slightly cambered
1	Irregular
0	Flat, cracked
Crust color
4	Normal, typical pastry, bright
3	Dark-bright, light-bright
2	Dark-light
1	Very dark, very light
0	Burnt
Crust thickness/hardness
4	Semirigid, half-thick
3	Rigid, rough
2	Thin, soft
1	Very thin, soft
0	Very soft
Crust/Crumb odor
4	Expressive, typical
3	Less expressive
2	Slightly expressive
1	Inexpressive
0	Strange
Crust/Crumb taste
4	Very agreeable
3	Undesirable, less expressive
2	Inexpressive
1	Sour
0	Strange
Crumb elasticity
4	Very good, soft
3	Good, soft
2	Sufficient
1	Low, brittle
0	Inelastic, adhesive
Crumb porosity
4	Equally distributed middle pores, soft walls
3	Less equally distributed middle pores, soft walls
2	Unequally distributed pores, thick walls, smaller cavities
1	Brittle, dense-pores, thick walls
0	Sticky, separable from crust, almost pore-free
Crumb color
4	Normal, typical
3	With a slight shade
2	With a darker colour shade
1	Darker
0	Dark
Crumb color (for wholemeal products)
4	Typical of wholemeal products
3	Less typical of wholemeal products
2	Darker, paler
1	Dark, annoying
0	Very dark, inconvenient
Crumb hardness (bite-resistance)
4	Very soft
3	Softer
2	Mildly riding
1	Rigider
0	Rigid
Crumb adhesiveness to palate (at longer chewing)
4	Very slightly adhesive, easily separable
3	Slightly adhesive, separable
2	Mildly adhesive
1	Fairly adhesive
0	Very adhesive

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Scale of the sensory scoring evaluation for various pastry sample types baked from the mixture of flours (55% wheat T 650, 30% spelt, and 15% rye T 930) with selected additives and for the samples produced from wheat flour T 512 with different additives shown in Table 1. The results of sensory scoring evaluation and camber ratio (height/width) of pastry samples are given in Tables 2 to 3. The following statistical parameters were analyzed: means (n = 6, n = 2), standard deviations (SD) and statistical differences are given with a 95% level of significance (P ≤ 0.05). The results of additive samples were compared with control having additives (yeast = 3%, sour dough = 1.2%) (series-1) and in the second series used samples with additives versus control (Lipopan = 0.001% and 0.003%, ascorbic acid = 0.0056%), without addition emulsifiers.

Table 2 Sensory scoring evaluation and camber ratio of pastry produced from mixture of flours (wheat 55% T650, spelt 30%, and rye 15% T930) with different additives.

		Additives
Sensory parameter		1	2	3	4	5	6	7
Product	Shape	2.83 ± 0.75 ^a	3.83 ± 0.41	3.50 ± 0.84	4.00 ± 0.00	3.67 ± 0.52	3.50 ± 0.55	3.67 ± 0.52
Crust	Color	4.00 ± 0.00	3.00 ± 0.11	3.17 ± 0.41	3.50 ± 0.55	3.17 ± 0.75	3.83 ± 0.41	3.50 ± 0.55
	Thickness	3.67 ± 0.82	3.83 ± 0.41	4.00 ± 0.00	3.33 ± 0.82	2.83 ± 0.98	3.83 ± 0.41	3.50 ± 0.55
	Hardness	3.67 ± 0.82	3.83 ± 0.41	4.00 ± 0.00	3.00 ± 0.89	3.00 ± 0.84	4.00 ± 0.00	3.67 ± 0.52
	Odor	3.17 ± 0.75	3.50 ± 0.84	3.50 ± 0.55	3.67 ± 0.52	3.50 ± 0.55	3.67 ± 0.52	3.83 ± 0.41
	Taste	3.33 ± 0.52	3.83 ± 0.41	3.67 ± 0.52	3.17 ± 0.75	3.83 ± 0.41	3.67 ± 0.52	4.00 ± 0.00
Crumb	Odor	3.50 ± 0.55	3.83 ± 0.41	3.67 ± 0.52	3.17 ± 0.75	3.67 ± 0.52	3.50 ± 0.55	4.00 ± 0.00
	Taste	3.33 ± 0.52	3.67 ± 0.52	3.67 ± 0.52	3.33 ± 0.52	3.83 ± 0.41	3.50 ± 0.55	3.83 ± 0.41
	Elasticity	3.67 ± 0.52	4.00 ± 0.00	3.67 ± 0.52	3.00 ± 0.63	3.50 ± 0.55	3.67 ± 0.52	3.67 ± 0.52
	Porosity	3.33 ± 0.82	3.50 ± 0.55	3.83 ± 0.11	3.33 ± 0.52	3.50 ± 0.55	3.83 ± 0.41	3.50 ± 0.55
	Color	3.83 ± 0.41	3.83 ± 0.41	4.00 ± 0.00	3.83 ± 0.41	3.67 ± 0.82	3.83 ± 0.41	4.00 ± 0.00
	Hardness	3.83 ± 0.41	3.83 ± 0.41	3.83 ± 0.41	3.50 ± 0.55	3.67 ± 0.52	3.67 ± 0.52	3.67 ± 0.52
	Adhesiveness (to palate at longer chewing)	3.50 ± 0.55	3.50 ± 0.55	3.17 ± 0.75	3.00 ± 1.10	3.17 ± 0.75	3.17 ± 0.75	3.67 ± 0.52
Σ		45.67	48.00	47.67	43.83	45.00	47.67	48.50
Camber ratio (height/width)		0.57 ^b	0.60	0.68	0.69	0.70	0.71	0.74
1: yeast = 5%; 2: yeast = 3%, sour dough = 1.2% (control); 3: yeast = 3%, sour dough = 1.2%, AA = 0.016%; 4: yeast = 3%, sour dough = 1.2%, BM = 0.02%; 5: yeast = 3%, sour dough = 1.2%, BM = 0.02%, AA = 0.016%; 6: yeast = 3%, sour dough = 1.2%, BM = 0.02%, AA = 0.016%, E 481:482 = 0.15%; 7; yeast = 3%, sour dough = 1.2%, F = 0.00067%, P = 0.001%, AA = 0.0016%, E 481:482 = 0.15%; ^a: average of six replicates ± S.D.; ^b: average of two replicates.

Table 3 Sensory scoring evaluation and camber ratio of pastry produced from wheat flour T512 with different additives.

		Additives
Sensory parameter		1	2	3	4	5	6
Product	Shape	2.17 ± 1.33 ^a	3.17 ± 1.17	3.67 ± 0.52	3.83 ± 0.41	4.00 ± 0.00	3.83 ± 0.41
Crust	Color	2.17 ± 0.41	3.33 ± 0.82	3.67 ± 0.52	4.00 ± 0.00	3.50 ± 0.84	3.67 ± 0.52
	Thickness	3.83 ± 0.41	3.83 ± 0.41	3.17 ± 1.33	4.00 ± 0.00	3.50 ± 0.84	3.83 ± 0.41
	Hardness	3.50 ± 0.57	3.67 ± 0.52	2.83 ± 1.33	4.00 ± 0.00	3.17 ± 0.75	3.17 ± 0.41
	Odor	3.83 ± 0.41	3.67 ± 0.52	3.67 ± 0.52	3.50 ± 0.55	3.83 ± 0.41	3.50 ± 0.84
	Taste	3.83 ± 0.41	3.83 ± 0.41	4.00 ± 0.00	3.67 ± 0.52	4.00 ± 0.00	3.33 ± 1.63
Crumb	Odor	4.0 ± 0.00	3.83 ± 0.41	3.83 ± 0.41	4.00 ± 0.00	3.83 ± 0.41	3.67 ± 0.52
	Taste	3.83 ± 0.41	3.83 ± 0.41	3.83 ± 0.41	3.67 ± 0.52	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00
	Elasticity	3.83 ± 0.41	3.83 ± 0.41	3.83 ± 0.41	3.83 ± 0.41	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00
	Porosity	3.50 ± 0.55	3.50 ± 0.55	3.67 ± 0.52	3.83 ± 0.41	3.50 ± 0.55	3.67 ± 0.52
	Color	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00
	Hardness	3.17 ± 0.98	3.50 ± 0.84	3.50 ± 0.84	3.67 ± 0.52	3.67 ± 0.82	3.17 ± 0.75
	Adhesiveness (to palate at longer chewing)	3.67 ± 0,82	3.67 ± 0.82	3.33 ± 1.21	3.0 ± 1.10	3.67 ± 0.82	3.33 ± 1.03
Σ		45.33	47.67	47.00	49.00	48.67	47.17
Camber ratio (height/width)		0.63 ^b	0.67	0.65	0.64	0.66	0.70
		Additives
Sensory parameter		7	8	9	10	11	12
Product	Shape	3.83 ± 0.41 ^a	4.00 ± 0.00	3.50 ± 0.55	3.83 ± 0.41	3.67 ± 0.82	4.00 ± 0.00
Crust	Color	3.83 ± 0.41	3.50 ± 0.59	3.33 ± 0.82	3.50 ± 0.55	4.00 ± 0.00	3.67 ± 0.52
	Thickness	4.00 ± 0.00	3.67 ± 0.59	3.67 ± 0.82	3.50 ± 0.84	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00
	Hardness	4.00 ± 0.00	3.67 ± 0.58	3.33 ± 1.03	3.50 ± 0.84	3.83 ± 0.41	3.83 ± 0.41
	Odor	3.67 ± 0.52	3.50 ± 0.57	3.67 ± 0.82	3.67 ± 0.52	3.67 ± 0.52	3.33 ± 0.52
	Taste	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00	3.50 ± 0.84	3.83 ± 0.41	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00
Crumb	Odor	4.00 ± 0.00	3.50 ± 0.57	3.67 ± 0.82	3.67 ± 0.52	4.00 ± 0.00	3.83 ± 0.41
	Taste	4.00 ± 0.00	3.50 ± 0.57	4.00 ± 0.00	3.83 ± 0.41	3.83 ± 0.41	4.00 ± 0.00
	Elasticity	3.50 ± 0.55	3.33 ± 0.57	3.83 ± 0.41	3.83 ± 0.41	3.67 ± 0.52	3.50 ± 0.55
	Porosity	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00	3.67 ± 0.52	3.50 ± 0.55	4.00 ± 0.00	3.83 ± 0.41
	Color	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00	4.00 ± 0.00
	Hardness	3.67 ± 0.52	3.67 ± 0.60	3.50 ± 0.84	3.17 ± 0.75	3.67 ± 0.52	3.83 ± 0.41
	Adhesiveness (to palate at longer chewing)	3.17 ± 0.75	2.67 ± 0.60	3.33 ± 1.03	3.33 ± 1.03	3.00 ± 0.89	3.00 ± 0.63
Σ		49.67	47.00	47.00	47.17	49.33	48.83
Camber ratio (height/width)		0.69 ^b	0.67	0.61	0.62	0.65	0.67
1: L = 0.001%, AA = 0.0056% (control); 2: L = 0.001%, AA = 0.0056%, E 481:482 = 0.15%; 3: L = 0.001%, AA = 0.0056%, E 481:482 = 0.05%; 4: L = 0.001%, AA = 0.0056%, E 481:482 = 0.02%; 5: L = 0.003%, AA = 0.0056% (control); 6: L = 0.003%, AA = 0.0056%, E 481:482 = 0.15%; ^a: average of six replicates ± S.D.; ^b: average of two replicates. 7: L = 0.003%, AA = 0.0056%, E 481:482 = 0.05%; 8: L = 0.003%, AA = 0.0056%, E 481:482 = 0.02%; 9: L = 0.005%, AA = 0.0056% (control); 10: L = 0.005%, AA = 0.0056%, E 481:482 = 0.15%; 11: L = 0.005%, AA = 0.0056%, E 481:482 = 0.05%; 12: L = 0.005%, AA = 0.0056%, E 481:482 = 0.02%; ^a: average of six replicates ± S.D.; ^b: average of two replicates.

Products from the Flour Mixture (Wheat, Rye, Spelt)

Table 2 incorporates the results of the sensory scoring evaluation of pastry produced from the mixture of flours (55% wheat T 650, 30% spelt, and 15% rye T 930) and selected additives. The results showed that all samples were evaluated by the highest degree of points (p) in the case of the crumb color which corresponded to that typical of the whole meal pastry (the highest mark of 4 points was given to the sample prepared from the 3% baker's yeast, 1.2% sour dough, and 0.016% ascorbic acid); the crumb odor of the sample with the addition of sour dough was denoted by assessors as agreeable and typically bread-like. The greatest differences were registered in the evaluation of adhesiveness (to palate after longer chewing), the lowest scoring evaluation (3.00 p) being assigned to the sample with the addition of 0.02% Bakezyme BM. It can be seen from Table 2, the product with the addition of 5% baker's yeast, but without any added substance, gained the lowest point evaluation in the shape (2.83 p) and the ratio number (0.57) associated with it. However, the crust color was characteristic of the wholemeal pastry with the highest value of 4.0 points. From the taste and cambering of the final products it is obvious that with the applied amount of additives the crust ratio numbers were rising: the highest level (0.74) belonged to the sample with the addition of F = 0.00067%, P = 0.003%, L = 0.001%, AA = 0.016%, E = 481:482 = 0.15%. This product obtained the maximum points within the total point evaluation (48.5 p). On the other hand, the lowest marks (total points, camber ratio) was evaluated a loaf with the yeast of 5%, without addition of sour dough and other used additives.

Products from Wheat Flour T 512

Table 3 presents a list of results of the sensory scoring evaluation of cereal products which were produced from wheat flour T 512 together with the additives of various concentrations. In the model experiment some changes in the sensory quality, which is dependent on the amount and ratio of the applied additives, were monitored, especially the influence of Lipopan on the potential reduction of emulsifiers. As it follows from Table 3, in the case of the samples with the addition of Lipopan (0.001%) and ascorbic acid (0.0056%), but with no emulsifiers, the remarkable deficiencies showed themselves in the product shape designated as irregular (2.17 p) and also in cambering (ratio number 0.63) and in the lowest total evaluation versus other products (45.33 p from possible 52 p). In this product, the low degree of evaluation was assigned also to its crust color (2.17 p) influenced by longer baking, whereas its crumb color and odor were given the maximum evaluation (4.00 p), and equally the crumb color (4.00 p) in all investigated samples. As for other pursued parameters, the more evident deviations appeared on evaluating the adhesive power (to plate at longer chewing). Especially the sample with the addition of AA = 0.0056% + L = 0.003% + E 481 : 482 = 0.02% was evaluated as “medium-adhesive” (2.67 p). The next samples were characterized as “little adhesive” and “very little adhesive.”

The evaluation of the total tastiness showed that assessors considered the most tasteful sample that which contained the addition of AA = 0.00056% + L = 0.003% + E 481:482 = 0.05% (49.67 p from the possible 52 p). In the total evaluation of tastiness the lowest number of points was attributed to the sample with the addition of AA = 0.0056% + L = 0.01% (45.33 p).

The evaluation of the micro-baked experiments permitted us to conclude that the addition of the Lipopan enzyme 50 BG at the concentration of 0.005% can lead to the reduction of the added amount of emulsifier because all physical parameters — mainly volumes and ratio numbers — provided more favorable results at its lower concentration. This, of course, corresponded also to the higher sensory evaluation of final products. Optimum composition of pastry was: Lipopan 0.003% and 0.005% + AA = 0.0056% + E 481:482 = 0.05%. On the basis of our results the new production pastry program was introduced by the Adivit Nitra Ltd. SR, which has been successfully established in the Slovak market.

CONCLUSION

The results from the model experiment showed that we succeeded to determine the ratio of flours (30% spelt, 55% T 650, and 15% T 930) and choose the concentrations and combinations of additives to achieve the optimum values, ratio numbers, technological, and organoleptic properties of final products. After adding the enzyme Lipopan 50 BG the reduced amount of emulsifiers was achieved due to the fact that the volumes and ratio numbers increased as the amount of the emulsifier decreased. Of course, the sensory quality of pastry improved, as well. Notwithstanding, the more comprehensive view would be possible if the future investigation was focused on a wider choice of additives applied at different concentration ranges and if the non-traditional cereal raw materials (buckwheat, chickpea, amaranth, etc.) were used to innovate and improve the total quality of final products.

NOMENCLATURE

L	=	Lipopan 50 BG
BM	=	Bakezyme BM
P	=	Pentopan Mono BG
F	=	Fungamyl BG
AA	=	Ascorbic acid
E	=	Emulsifiers