Download - NUTR390_Final Report Biscuits
BUILDING(A(BETTER(BISCUIT:(THE(EFFECT(OF(VARIOUS(TYPES(OF(FIBER(ON((FUNCTIONAL(&(SENSORY(CHARACTERISTICS((Noelle(Cegielski,(Leah(Johnston((
1(
ABSTRACT
Background: Fiber intake rates in the United States are critically low, having long-term implications
related to the risk of cardiovascular disease, hypertension, gastrointestinal issues, obesity, type 2
diabetes, and a plethora of related health disorders. Consuming a breakfast that is high in fiber promotes
satiety throughout the rest of the day and subsequent positive outcomes, such as weight loss.
Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine the overall functional properties, sensory
characteristics, and nutrient content of biscuits in an attempt to produce a product that is classified as a
good source of fiber.
Methods: Using a variety of ingredients through several trials including whole-wheat (WW) flour,
white whole-wheat (WWW) flour, Hi-Maize natural fiber, bread flour, and garbanzo beans, fiber content
was increased significantly from the baseline product. Three untrained panelists participated in
evaluating the biscuits using a seven-point Hedonic scale using varying descriptors specific to the
characteristic being examined.
Results: Analysis of the overall variance between trials indicated that there was a significant effect on
the fiber content when altering the ingredients, primarily flours, used in the biscuit. The characteristic
ratings were on the positive end of the scale for all trials. The final product was selected by preference
and similar rating set to that of the baseline. Hi-Maize natural fiber (resistant starch) provided the most
significant boost in fiber while retaining favorable sensory characteristics as determined by a sensory
panel.
Conclusions: The study demonstrates that Hi-Maize natural fiber can replace a portion of the flour in
baked goods to increase fiber and retain acceptable sensory characteristics.
BUILDING(A(BETTER(BISCUIT:(THE(EFFECT(OF(VARIOUS(TYPES(OF(FIBER(ON((FUNCTIONAL(&(SENSORY(CHARACTERISTICS((Noelle(Cegielski,(Leah(Johnston((
2(
INTRODUCTION
The absence of adequate amounts of fiber in the standard American diet has been well reported
and documented over recent years. The 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans labels fiber as a nutrient
of concern. More than 90% of adults and children are not meeting the daily recommendations for fiber
intake (1). Current adequate intake (AI) recommendations for adults are 38 grams for men and 25 grams
for women. The AI for children under eight years of age is 19 to 25 grams (2). The low levels of fiber
intake have greater long-term implications and are related to an increased risk of coronary heart disease,
hypertension, high LDL cholesterol, stroke, obesity, gastrointestinal disorders, and metabolic
dysfunctions such as type 2 diabetes. Over the last several years, efforts to increase fiber intake amongst
Americans, through the promotion of fruits, vegetables, and whole grain foods, have not produced the
anticipated positive results in raising daily fiber consumption (1). Due to the unsubstantial impact of
these endeavors, there remains a need for successful educational and motivational strategies to increase
fiber intake in the diets of Americans.
Breakfast and convenience or ready-to-eat meals have become a trend and increasingly popular
in America (3). The purpose of this experiment is to convert a well-established food item, the breakfast
biscuit as seen on the McDonalds breakfast Menu and other popular food establishments, and consumed
on a regular basis, into a good source of dietary fiber. A product within the range of 10% to 19% of the
recommended daily value for a particular nutrient is considered to be a good source; therefore, 3.8 grams
per biscuit is appropriate for both men and women based on their respective AI. This will be
accomplished by first by substituting the white and cake flours in the biscuit recipe with different types
of flours that contain higher fiber content, such as whole wheat, oat, quinoa, or buckwheat. Hi-amylose
maize (Hi-Maize natural fiber) is known as a resistant starch and a functional fiber because it is resistant
BUILDING(A(BETTER(BISCUIT:(THE(EFFECT(OF(VARIOUS(TYPES(OF(FIBER(ON((FUNCTIONAL(&(SENSORY(CHARACTERISTICS((Noelle(Cegielski,(Leah(Johnston((
3(
to digestive enzymes in the small intestine. Some studies have reported that Hi-Maize can be used as a
complete or partial replacement for all-purpose flour in baked products without significantly altering the
sensory characteristics (4). The objective is to determine which type of flour will produce a product that
demonstrates similar sensory and objective evaluation results to that of the baseline product and meets
the requirements to be classified as a good source of dietary fiber. Other substitutions or additions to the
recipe may be necessary to meet the goal, such as ground flax seed, chia seed, or vegetables.
BUILDING(A(BETTER(BISCUIT:(THE(EFFECT(OF(VARIOUS(TYPES(OF(FIBER(ON((FUNCTIONAL(&(SENSORY(CHARACTERISTICS((Noelle(Cegielski,(Leah(Johnston((
4(
MATERIALS & METHODS
Materials
Cake flour (white, Swans Down, New Orleans, LA); bread flour (enriched, unbleached, Gold
Medal, Minneapolis, MN); baking powder (double acting, Red Star, Milwaukee, WI); baking soda (Arm
and Hammer, Princeton, NJ); salt (Cargill, Cleveland, OH); sugar (white, granulated, GFS, Grand
Rapids, MI); buttermilk (low-fat, cultured, Kemp’s, St. Paul, MN); cream (heavy, whipping, Meijer,
Grand Rapids, MI); eggs (Eggland’s Best, Malvern, PA & Roundy’s, Milwaukee, WI); butter (unsalted,
Roundy’s, Milwaukee, WI); flour (whole wheat, King Arthur, Norwich, VT); flour (all- purpose, GFS
Grand Rapids, MI); flour (white, whole wheat, King Arthur, Norwich, VT); flaxseed meal (ground,
golden, Bob’s Red Mill, Milwaukie, OR); garbanzo beans (canned, whole, drained, Roundy’s,
Milwaukee, WI); milk (whole, Lucerne Pleasanton, CA); Hi-maize Natural Fiber (corn, resistant starch,
King Arthur, Norwich, VT); water (tap, room temperature, approximately 68°F).
BUILDING(A(BETTER(BISCUIT:(THE(EFFECT(OF(VARIOUS(TYPES(OF(FIBER(ON((FUNCTIONAL(&(SENSORY(CHARACTERISTICS((Noelle(Cegielski,(Leah(Johnston((
5(
Biscuit Preparation
All formulas used for the biscuit preparation are reported in Table 1. Flours were replaced and/or
added at different percentages along with fat content in later labs. Dry ingredients were individually
weighed and then added to the same mixing bowl where they were stirred with a wooden spoon for 24
rotations until all incorporated. Liquid ingredients were individually weighed and then placed into a
separate mixing bowl. A metal whisk was used to beat the room temperature egg and whisked briskly
BUILDING(A(BETTER(BISCUIT:(THE(EFFECT(OF(VARIOUS(TYPES(OF(FIBER(ON((FUNCTIONAL(&(SENSORY(CHARACTERISTICS((Noelle(Cegielski,(Leah(Johnston((
6(
for 20-25 seconds to combine with the other liquid ingredients. The garbanzo beans were drained, added
to a food processor (using the smaller attachment) with water, and pureed for 32 seconds. A rubber
spatula was used to scrape the sides of the food processor and then the beans were pureed for an
additional 14 seconds. The pureed garbanzo beans were gently folded into the whisked wet ingredients
using a wooden spoon. Cold butter chunks (approximately 48.2° F, 9° C) were incorporated into the
flour mixture by hand using the fingertips until the butter was broken down into the size of corn kernels,
about two minutes. The wet ingredients were added to the dry ingredients and quickly mixed by hand
forming a slightly sticky ball of dough. All-purpose flour was sprinkled onto the countertop surface, to
prevent the dough from sticking, where the dough was kneaded by hand 32 times. The dough was then
rolled out to 7 x 7 inches to 7.5 x 7.5 inches (177.8 mm x 177.8 mm to 190.5 mm x 190.5 mm) using a
wooden rolling pin that was dusted with all-purpose flour. A 2-¼ inch (57.15 mm) round metal cutter
was dipped in all-purpose flour and used to cut out 9 biscuits. Eight of the nine biscuits were placed in a
nine inch round cake pan lined with parchment paper. Biscuits were arranged around the pan in a circle
with the sides touching each other and the pan so the biscuits cooked evenly and resulted in a higher
biscuit. The remaining biscuit was placed in a separate nine inch round cake pan with parchment and
placed in the oven at the same time as the other biscuits. Biscuits baked in a 450° F oven (230° C) on the
center rack for 15 minutes. Biscuits were removed from the oven and left in the pan. After three
minutes, they were separated and placed on a cooling rack where they cooled for another four minutes.
Biscuits were served warmed immediately after cooling at an internal temperature of 140-144° F/60-
62.22° C).
(
(
BUILDING(A(BETTER(BISCUIT:(THE(EFFECT(OF(VARIOUS(TYPES(OF(FIBER(ON((FUNCTIONAL(&(SENSORY(CHARACTERISTICS((Noelle(Cegielski,(Leah(Johnston((
7(
TABLE 2. Equipment Chart
Equipment Manufacturer Serial Number/Size Model Number Material
Scale AND Company, Ltd 5A2844888 EJ-200 50004 N/A
Oven General Electric LM286481 Q JGSP28BEK4BB N/A
Round baking pan N/A 1.750H x 9.000W x 9.000D N/A Aluminum
Rolling pin N/A Length: 10 inches N/A Wood
Round Biscuit Cutter Crate and Barrel 2.25 inches N/A Stainless steel
Parchment Paper Pan Liner 16' x 24" N/A Parchment
Food Processor Kitchen Aid WJH06003187 KFP600WH N/A Handheld Can Opener Oxo 7" x 2" x 3" 28081V3 Stainless steel
N/A - Not Available or Non-Applicable (
Objective Measurements
Objective measurement tests were completed to help establish the perfect biscuit that not only
reached nutritional goals but were also favored by sensory panelists for appearance of the product.
Biscuits were weighed on a scale prior to being baked (raw weight) and also after baked and cooled.
After baking the height and the diameter of the biscuit were measured using a caliper. Internal
temperature of the biscuit was taken with a digital thermometer after cooling along with external
temperature using a laser gun. This was done to determine the proper temperature to serve the biscuit.
The color of the biscuit was determined and recorded using a color guide of paint swatches. Both the
outside (crust) and inside (middle) of the biscuit were tested to find a color appealing to the eye for
appearance. Nutritional Analysis was recorded using the software program Food Works 17 (5).
BUILDING(A(BETTER(BISCUIT:(THE(EFFECT(OF(VARIOUS(TYPES(OF(FIBER(ON((FUNCTIONAL(&(SENSORY(CHARACTERISTICS((Noelle(Cegielski,(Leah(Johnston((
8(
Sensory Evaluation
Three female college students from Dominican University partook as untrained panelists on the
sensory team and used a Hedonic scale to rate the aroma, appearance, color, flavor, mouthfeel, moisture,
ease of eating, and likeliness to purchase the biscuit (see Appendix B for Hedonic rating scales). Each
biscuit was evaluated separately. Biscuits were served after cooling to an internal temperature of
approximately 140-144° F (60-62.22° C). Biscuits were placed side by side on a white plate, with a
dashed light blue border. The biscuits were given a random number that corresponded to its sensory
evaluation form so panelists were unaware of what was different about each biscuit. They were also
served with a glass of room temperature tap water and a plain, white napkin. The sensory tests were
conducted in the nutrition lab, Quantity Kitchen at Dominican University. Illumination of the room was
appropriate with standard white light bulbs. Panelists were seated next to one another at a metal table
and separated by white, cardboard dividers. The sensory panelists were instructed not to discuss with
one another while tasting biscuits and recording their evaluations.
Statistical Analyses
Objective tests were repeated three times and the average was taken. Sensory ratings from the
three panelists were recorded and also averaged. From the data, means and standard deviations were
calculated using Microsoft Excel 2013 and recorded in the provided tables also compiled in Excel.
BUILDING(A(BETTER(BISCUIT:(THE(EFFECT(OF(VARIOUS(TYPES(OF(FIBER(ON((FUNCTIONAL(&(SENSORY(CHARACTERISTICS((Noelle(Cegielski,(Leah(Johnston((
9(
TABLE 3. Fiber & Fat content of biscuits prepared with various percentages of ingredients
Ingredient Baseline
1Whole Wheat
Flour
2White Whole
Wheat (WWW) Flour +
Flaxseed Meal
2AWhole Wheat (WW) Flour +
Flaxseed Meal
3Garbanzo
beans + butter
3AGarbanzo
beans, no butter
4WWW Flour +
Hi-Maize + Bread Flour
4AWWW Flour + Hi-Maize, no bread flour
5Hi-Maize reduction, Bread flour
increase5A
Whole Milk% % % % % % % % % %
Cake Flour 23Bread Flour 21 20.53 20.12 19.95 20.03 20.23 13.41 14.45 14.27Whole Wheat Flour 22.94 22.3White Whole Wheat Flour 22.49 22.39 22.62 19.17 22.61 18.9 18.66Hi-Maize Natural Fiber 10.03 19.88 8.65 8.54All-Purpose Flour1 1.54 1.09 1.31 1.16 1.17 0.7 0.7 2.64 2.61Ground Golden Flaxseed Meal 2.38 2.36 2.38 2.39 2.4 2.4 2.36 2.33Double Acting Baking Powder 2 2.2 2.16 2.14 2.14 2.17 2.16 2.17 2.13 2.1Baking Soda 0.5 0.52 0.51 0.5 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.5 0.5Salt 0.6 0.59 0.59 0.57 0.58 0.59 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.57Granulated Sugar 2 2.25 2.2 2.19 2.19 2.21 2.21 2.23 2.18 2.15Buttermilk 19 19 18.63 18.39 18.57 18.72 18.72 18.76 18.46 18.22Heavy Whipping Cream 8 8.34 8.19 8.1 8.16 8.22 8.22 8.22 8.11Whole Milk 8.14Eggs 10 9.03 8.85 9.48 9.47 8.49 9.37 9.39 8.7 9.72Unsalted Butter 13 13.06 12.8 12.7 6.25 6.29 6.3 6.2 6.12Garbanzo Beans 6.182 12.682 6.232 6.24 3.82 3.77Water 2.33 2.3Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Fiber & Fat Content (grams per serving)Fiber 0 0.8 1.74 2.2944 2.132 1.2954 5.181 9.5174 4.656 5.9934
Fat 11.3 7 8.6 10.34 5.216 4.2864 5.501 6.114 5.077 5.2144
1All-Purpose flour used for dusting the kneading and rolling surface and rolling pin. Was measured calculated in Baseline.2Percentage reflects the weight of pureed garbanzo beans with liquid.3Lab 1A not included - Variable was the size of the biscuit cutters. Separate nutrient analysis were not conducted.4Analyzed using raw dough total weight.
RESULTS & DISCUSSION
Table 3 provides the percentages of each ingredient used by trial and the corresponding fiber and
fat content of the product. The baseline product contained no grams of fiber and 11.3 grams of fat. By
altering the main source of flour throughout the future trials, the fiber content continued to increase
through the experiment. The substitution of whole-wheat flour (WW) increased the fiber content to only
0.8 grams. The fat decreased by 38% due to a reduction in the size and weight of the biscuit. Sensory
panels preferred the aroma, color, and flavor of the whole-wheat biscuit to the control biscuit (Table 4).
The use of white whole-wheat flour (WWW) saw a 54% increase in fiber content and 65% increase
(based on the raw weight of the dough). The fat also increased in conjunction with an increase in weight
as we looked to solidify the preferred size and weight of the biscuit. A combination of white whole-
wheat flour and ground golden flaxseed meal accounted for an additional increase as well as an
BUILDING(A(BETTER(BISCUIT:(THE(EFFECT(OF(VARIOUS(TYPES(OF(FIBER(ON((FUNCTIONAL(&(SENSORY(CHARACTERISTICS((Noelle(Cegielski,(Leah(Johnston((
10(
improvement in the biscuit color. The WWW and ground golden flaxseed meal biscuit was preferred
over the whole-wheat flour by the panelists. With the addition of the garbanzo beans, there was a slight
increase of 18.4% in fiber. The ingredient that made the greatest impact on the fiber content was Hi-
Maize natural fiber or resistant starch that was added to the recipe in different amounts. Hi-Maize was
substituted for 15% of the white whole-wheat flour and 33% of the bread flour resulting in a significant
surge in fiber content by 59%. Sensory panelists gave the product positive markings. When the bread
flour was completely eliminated, there was a high uptick in fiber, but less than satisfactory sensory
results due to the flavor, mouthfeel and moisture of the biscuit. From this finding, 7.05 grams of bread
flour was added and the amount of hi-maize natural fiber was lowered to 7.08 grams. The effect of the
adjustment was a 10% decrease in fiber; however, the sensory panel greatly preferred the combination of
Hi-Maize and bread flour in all categories with the exception of color. Despite the decline in fiber
content, the product still exceeded fiber goals by 18.4% (4.656 g).
The secondary goal to increasing fiber was to lower the fat content of the biscuit by cutting the
amount of butter used and replacing this fat with garbanzo beans (pureed). Butter was incorporated at
6.25% (as a standard percentage based on the gram weight of all ingredients) and 6.18% pureed
garbanzo beans, As expected, the fat content was reduced by 53.8% from the baseline product. As
shown in table 4, with the removal of a portion or all of the butter, there was a corresponding decrease in
the sensory ratings for flavor, mouthfeel, moisture and ease of eating in comparison with baseline.
BUILDING(A(BETTER(BISCUIT:(THE(EFFECT(OF(VARIOUS(TYPES(OF(FIBER(ON((FUNCTIONAL(&(SENSORY(CHARACTERISTICS((Noelle(Cegielski,(Leah(Johnston((
11(
Table 4 displays the results of the sensory panel in detail noting standard deviations. The
baseline product receives the most favorable ratings across the board in comparison with other products.
While the ratings may have decreased from the baseline product, generally the opinions of the panelists
remained on the positive end of the rating scale for all characteristics evaluated. There was a substantial
decrease in the aroma rating with pureed garbanzo beans replaced the butter 100% and with the removal
of the bread flour. The panelists preferred the effect of the WWW flour and golden ground flaxseed
meal in contrast with the WW flour and golden ground flaxseed meal. The outside color of the biscuits
fluctuated depending on the ingredients as well as the oven used to bake the biscuits. Flavor ratings
remained steady, but saw an unfavorable drop with the removal of butter and bread flour. However, the
panelists rated the product with no butter slightly higher in regard to mouthfeel. The final product
received a higher mean rating for flavor than the baseline product at 6.67. A key challenge was
maintaining moisture while substituting flours and butter. The substitution of WW flour saw an increase
in the moisture rating from baseline. The ease of eating category was established as an evaluation of the
structure and flakiness of the biscuit. The ratings showed little fluctuation throughout the process with
the exception of the removal of bread flour. The ratings most received in the likeliness to purchase
category were Somewhat Likely, Likely, or Very likely for all trials. While the overall ratings through
the experiment were favorable, there were generally lower than then baseline product. The final selected
product containing a combination of Hi-Maize, WWW flour, and bread flour received ratings that were
the most reflective of the baseline in comparison with all other biscuit products.
A limitation in this study is the varying size and weights of the raw and baked biscuits. The
baseline recipe produced a heavier and bigger product, resulting in experimentation with various sized
biscuit cutters. Once the preferred weight and size of the biscuits was established, the biscuits became
BUILDING(A(BETTER(BISCUIT:(THE(EFFECT(OF(VARIOUS(TYPES(OF(FIBER(ON((FUNCTIONAL(&(SENSORY(CHARACTERISTICS((Noelle(Cegielski,(Leah(Johnston((
12(
more consistent. Initially, this had an impact on the nutrient analysis comparisons between products. The
research supports the findings of other studies on the effect and use of resistant starch in the place of
flour in baked goods on consumer favorability and fiber content. Further research is necessary to
improve upon the moisture of the final product. Food gums have been suggested as a possible moisture
additive due to their water-binding properties. Xanthan Gum is considered a natural product derived
from bacterial fermentation using nutrient sources is often used as an emulsion stabilizer in salad
dressings and to bind water to improve moisture in baked products.
BUILDING(A(BETTER(BISCUIT:(THE(EFFECT(OF(VARIOUS(TYPES(OF(FIBER(ON((FUNCTIONAL(&(SENSORY(CHARACTERISTICS((Noelle(Cegielski,(Leah(Johnston((
13(
CONCLUSIONS
The study was successful in meeting and exceeding the goals. The fiber content of the final
product was 4.656 grams, classifying the product as an excellent source of fiber (6). The Hi-Maize
natural fiber, a resistant starch, proved to be a good substitution for a portion of flour in recipes for
baked goods to increase fiber content. A combination of Hi-Maize, white whole wheat flour, bread flour,
ground golden flaxseed meal, and garbanzo beans were contributors to the elevation in fiber and
produced a product with similar sensory results as the baseline product. The total fat was also reduced
by 55% from the baseline product. The outcome of the study has implications for more research on
substituting resistant starches in some of America’s most beloved foods to fill the fiber gap in their diet.
BUILDING(A(BETTER(BISCUIT:(THE(EFFECT(OF(VARIOUS(TYPES(OF(FIBER(ON((FUNCTIONAL(&(SENSORY(CHARACTERISTICS((Noelle(Cegielski,(Leah(Johnston((
14(
REFERENCES
1) Clemens R, Kranz S, Mobley A. et al. Filling America's Fiber Intake Gap: Summary of a
Roundtable to Probe Realistic Solutions with a Focus on Grain-Based Foods. Journal of
Nutrition. 2012; 142 (7): 1390S-401S. doi:10.3945/jn.112.160176.
2) Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs): Recommended Dietary Allowances and Adequate Intakes,
Total Water and Macronutrients. United States Department of Agriculture Web Site. Url:
http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/DRI/DRI_Tables/DRI_RDAs_Adequate_Intakes_Total_Water_Ma
cronutrients.pdf. Published 2005. Accessed September 10, 2015.
3) Bartelme M. Thinking Outside the Cereal Box for Breakfast. Food Technology. 2014; 68(11).
Url: http://www.ift.org/Food-
Technology/PastIssues/2014/November/Features/Breakfast.aspx?page=viewall.
4) Maziarz M, Sherrard M, Juma S, et al. Sensory characteristics of high-amylose maize-resistant
starch in three food products. Food Sci Nutr. 2012; 1(2): 117-124. doi:10.1002/fsn3.15.
5) FoodWorks 17. Foodworks™ Nutrient Analysis Software. Version 15.0. The Nutrition
Company, Long Valley, NJ.
6) Guidance for Industry: A Food Labeling Guide (10. Appendix B: Additional Requirements for
Nutrient Content Claims). U.S. Food and Drug Administration Web Site.
http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/Labe
lingNutrition/ucm064916.htm. Published January 2013. Accessed December 14, 2015.
(
!
!