MARATTO

article · Food Science & Nutrition

Effect of drying methods and blending ratios on dough rheological properties, physical and sensory properties of wheat–taro flour composite bread

In plain language

This research evaluates how different drying methods and blending ratios of taro flour influence the dough rheology, physical properties, and sensory qualities of wheat and taro composite bread. Testing involved substituting wheat flour with 10, 15, and 20 grams of taro flour per 100 grams of wheat flour. The results showed that drying methods, blending ratios, and their interactions significantly altered farinographic properties, including water absorption capacity, dough development time, stability time, breakdown time, mixing tolerance index, and farinographic quality number. Higher proportions of taro flour raised water absorption capacity from 57.38 percent to 58.23 percent and increased the mixing tolerance index. Although plain wheat bread achieved superior sensory scores compared to composite loaves, sensory evaluations established that taro flour can be successfully incorporated at levels up to 15 grams per 100 grams of wheat flour without compromising overall product acceptability.

Key takeaways

  • Drying methods and blending ratios significantly alter dough rheological traits, including dough stability and water absorption.
  • Increasing taro flour content from 10 to 20 grams per 100 grams of wheat flour increases both water absorption capacity and the mixing tolerance index.
  • Sensory acceptability decreases as the proportion of taro flour in the bread increases.
  • Composite bread remains sensorially acceptable when taro flour replaces wheat flour at levels up to 15 grams per 100 grams.

Why it matters

Substituting locally available crops like taro for commercial wheat flour can help diversify food sources and reduce reliance on imported grains. Understanding how taro processing and blending affect dough behaviour ensures that composite breads retain the physical handling properties and taste profiles required by consumers, supporting broader use of indigenous root crops in everyday staple foods.

Commercialisation angle

The findings are directly applicable to commercial bakeries and food processors seeking to formulate composite flour baked goods. This research represents applied and tested laboratory work that establishes a practical formulation threshold of up to 15 percent taro flour substitution. Scaling this formulation could enable milling and baking enterprises to introduce novel, locally sourced bread products with validated consumer acceptability.

AI-generated from the published abstract. Always read the original work before citing.

Abstract

Abstract The study was conducted to evaluate the effect of taro drying methods and blending ratios on the physical quality attributes and sensory quality of wheat–taro bread and rheological properties of the blend dough. Farinographic properties like water absorption capacity, dough development time, dough stability time, time to break down, mixing tolerance index, and farinographic quality number were significantly ( p < .05) affected by drying methods and blending ratio and their interaction. Increased taro flour (10–20 g) per 100 g of wheat flour resulted in an increased water absorption capacity (57.38%–58.23%) and mixing tolerance index (67.33–70.21 FU). The sensory analysis had revealed that as taro flour blending ratio increased the acceptability of blended breads were reduced. With respect to physical and sensory properties, the control bread had better acceptability than that of 10, 15, and 20 g taro flour‐mixed bread. The study revealed that there is possibility of incorporating taro flour up to 15 g per 100 g of wheat flour with acceptable sensory attributes of the composite bread.

Research topics

  • Food composition and properties
  • Polysaccharides Composition and Applications
  • Microbial Metabolites in Food Biotechnology

Sustainable Development Goals

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.1002/fsn3.444

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.

No discussion yet. Open the first thread.