Effect of tempering moisture and infrared heating temperature on the functionality of Desi chickpea and hull‐less barley flours

Abstract

Background and objectives:The effect of seed tempering moisture (20% moisture content or left un-tempered) and infrared heating surface temperature (115 or 135°C) on the functional properties of Desi chickpea and hull-less barley was investigated. Findings: Tempering and infrared heating reduced the protein solubility in both flours, whereas the ability to bind oil was unaffected. Both flours had increased water binding abilities in response to tempering and infrared heating. In the case of chickpea flour, the emulsion activity (EA) increased when the seeds were tempered and heated to 135°C, whereas both emulsion and foaming stability remained unchanged with all processing conditions. Tempering before infrared heating decreased the foaming capacity of chickpea flour. In contrast, barley flour showed a decrease in both EA and stability, and became nonfoaming with infrared heating with and without tempering. Conclusions: Infrared heating has both positive and negative effects on the functional properties of Desi chickpea and hull-less barley flours. Significance and novelty: Findings from this work will help direct ingredient processors to process seeds to achieve different functionalities which is important for food product development purposes. K E Y W O R D S/journal/cche Cereal Chemistry. 2018;95:508-517. | 509 How to cite this article: Bai T, Stone AK, Nickerson MT. Effect of tempering moisture and infrared heating temperature on the functionality of Desi chickpea and hull-less barley flours. Cereal Chem. 2018;95:508-517. https://doi.

Effect of barrel temperature and feed moisture on the physical properties of chickpea, sorghum, and maize extrudates and the functionality of their resultant flours—Part 1

“…Maize flour and all its precooked flours did not form foams. FA for unprocessed chickpea (~217%) and sorghum (~117%) reported by Bai et al () and Elbaloula, Yang, Guo, and Gu (), respectively, agrees with this study. Akubor and Onimawo () reported that FA of maize flour was 4%, the slightly greater FA compared to the results in this study could be due to the higher protein content (~9%) of their maize flour.…”

“…If protein solubility is poor, less protein can migrate to the interface and no stable foam can be developed. Decreased foaming capacity has been reported for tempered chickpea (20% moisture) flour when heated at 115 and 135°C (Bai et al, ). The absence of FA and FS for all the precooked flours in this study implies that extrusion probably rendered a combination of low protein solubility, protein denaturation, and thus poor protein migration to the air–water interface to support foam formation.…”

“…Water hydration capacity was determined according to AACC method 56‐20.01 (AACC, ) and reported as g water per g flour. Oil holding capacity was measured according to Bai, Stone, and Nickerson () and reported as the g oil per g flour. Foaming (capacity and stability) and emulsifying (activity and stability) properties were all performed according to Bai et al () on a 1% (w/w) flour suspension at pH 7.0.…”

“…Water hydration capacity was determined according to AACC method 56-20.01 (AACC, 1999) and reported as g water per g flour. Oil holding capacity was measured according to Bai, Stone, and Nickerson (2018) and reported as the g oil per g flour.…”

“…Foaming (capacity and stability) and emulsifying (activity and stability) properties were all performed according to Bai et al (2018) on a 1% (w/w) flour suspension at pH 7.0.…”