|کد مقاله||کد نشریه||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||نسخه تمام متن|
|6451703||1361374||2016||7 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||دانلود رایگان|
- Literature review of domestic breadmaker use for bread and dough research.
- Comparison of breadmaker to scaled down Tweedy mixer.
- Opposing trends found for breadmaker and Tweedy with varying formulation.
- Breadmaker results can give misleading indications of behaviour at industrial scale.
Industrial breadmaking equipment typically processes batches of 200Â kg or more of raw ingredients, while scaled down versions are widely used for research and development studies. A literature review shows that the use of domestic breadmakers has become routine to enable cheaper and more convenient small batch production of bread which facilitates assessment of new ingredients and formulations, and for other studies on bread and the breadmaking process. However, whilst recipe formulations can be scaled down, the process in a breadmaker may not be an accurate representation of industrial processes, leading to differences in aspects of bread quality and the nature and direction of ingredient effects. This short communication assesses whether breadmaker-produced bread is representative of bread produced using industrial methods, and therefore if the results of studies conducted on breadmaker-produced breads are representative of those that would be obtained on industrial equipment. A study of some quality parameters in breads made using a household breadmaker versus scaled down industrial breadmaking equipment showed an opposing trend for the relationship between sugar content and specific volume, and between sugar content and crumb firmness, in loaves made from both methods. The differing quality parameters of breadmaker-produced loaves compared to loaves produced in scaled down industrial breadmaking equipment suggested that breadmaker-produced breads can give misleading indications of likely ingredient effects at industrial scale.
Journal: Food and Bioproducts Processing - Volume 100, Part A, October 2016, Pages 54-60