Possibilities to Use Germinated Lupine Flour as an Ingredient in Breadmaking to Improve the Final Product Quality
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Revision of the manuscript entitled: Possibilities to Use Germinated Lupine Flour as an Ingredient in Bread Making in Order to improve it Quality
Authors: Denisa Atudorei, Sorina Ropciuc, and Georgiana Gabriela Codină
In my opinion the article is well written and the novelty is adequate. Applications of lupine flour as improver in bread and bakery products are widely investigated in the literature. However, despite this, the paper might be of technical and practical interest to many readers of this journal. So, I believe that this paper needs Minor Revisions
Here following some comments that must be addressed:
Title:
Maybe better: Possibilities to Use Germinated Lupine Flour as an Ingredient in Bread Making to improve the final product Quality
Abstract:
Line 9: to improve what? Dough rheology ? bread characteristics? Or both? Please specify and remove the word it + form the technological point of view ( i.e. …to improve dough rheology and bread characteristics.)
Line 18: or quality or characteristics here. I suggest to remove quality. Moreover put a comma after characteristics.
Introduction:
Line 28–32: I definitely agree with you but all these sentences (5-6) (despite a few English errors that I have corrected in my suggestion below) have no refences that support your statements. The first sentence do not need support since it is widely known; however, I strongly recommend to cite some paper in the following sentences:
Line 29-32: Therefore, it is desirable that bakery products have a balanced nutritional profile [1]. Among these, the most consumed one is the refined wheat flour bread [2].
Please add these papers in your references list and scale of two position the old references:
[1] Cappelli, A., Lupori, L., & Cini, E. Baking technology: A systematic review of machines and plants and their effect on final products, including improvement strategies. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 2021, 115, 275–284.
[2] Venturi, M., Cappelli, A., Pini, N., Galli, V., Lupori, L., Granchi, L., & Cini, E. Effects of kneading machine type and total element revolutions on dough rheology and bread characteristics: A focus on straight dough and indirect (biga) methods. LWT–Food Science and Technology, 2022, 153, 112500.
Line 39: please rephrase:
A successful alternative is the substitution of wheat flour with different legumes flours.
Line 49-50: …consumption is related to their alkaloids content (quinolizidine derivatives) that are toxic and harmful for human health.
Line 70-72: these sentence sound like an experimental result so or you move this sentence to the results and discussion section or you need to eliminate that. Alternatively, you can cite a paper that support your statement.
Line 79: Until today, only a few studies investigated the use of lupine…
Line 85: For this reasons, the aim….
Materials and methods:
Line 93: please explain what mean type 650
Results:
Very good job, I don’t have any suggestion here.
Discussion:
Line 426: Cappelli. Please correct
Line 425-427: this is true only for substitution with chickpea flour higher than 10%. Please specify it in the paper. The authors you cited found, instead, an increase of L values in the cause of substitution with 5% chickpea flour which improved also bread characteristics (in particular bread volume).
Line 517 and 532: moreover instead of more.
In my opinion, only one additional explanation is needed: please explain how the lupine flour improved the bread characteristics (in particular bread volume), despite the reader can see a lowering of alveographic indexes (in particular W). Usually, we expect a worsening effect on bread characteristics when dough rheological properties decrease. You, instead, found an improvement of bread quality. Please explain better how and why in discussion section (rheology and bread characteristics sections).
Conclusions:
Line 624: here and in the whole manuscript breadmaking not bread-making.
Moreover, please correct as follow: …to the breadmaking recipe affected both the rheological properties of dough than the qualitative characteristics of bread.
Line 639: remove had
Author Response
3 March 2022
Dear Referee,
We would like to thank the referee for the close reading and for the proper suggestions. We hope that we provide all the answers to the reviewer’s comments.
Thank you very much for the recommendations to publish our paper entitled “Possibilities to Use Germinated Lupine Flour as an Ingredient in Bread Making in Order to improve it Quality”.
The present version of the paper has been revised according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
We uploaded the corrected version of the article for which we used the red color for the addition text.
REFERE COMMENTS:
Referee comments: In my opinion the article is well written and the novelty is adequate. Applications of lupine flour as improver in bread and bakery products are widely investigated in the literature. However, despite this, the paper might be of technical and practical interest to many readers of this journal. So, I believe that this paper needs Minor Revisions
Response: We would like to thank to the referee for his/her close reading of our manuscript and for his/her appreciation.
Referee comments: Here following some comments that must be addressed:
Title:
Maybe better: Possibilities to Use Germinated Lupine Flour as an Ingredient in Bread Making to improve the final product Quality
Response: We agree with referee suggestions. We changed the title as he/she suggested.
Referee comments: Abstract: Line 9: to improve what? Dough rheology ? bread characteristics? Or both? Please specify and remove the word it + form the technological point of view (i.e. …to improve dough rheology and bread characteristics.)
Response: We corrected and changed according to referee suggestions.
Referee comments: Line 18: or quality or characteristics here. I suggest to remove quality. Moreover put a comma after characteristics.
Response: We removed quality according to the referee suggestions.
Referee comments: Introduction:
Line 28–32: I definitely agree with you but all these sentences (5-6) (despite a few English errors that I have corrected in my suggestion below) have no refences that support your statements. The first sentence do not need support since it is widely known; however, I strongly recommend to cite some paper in the following sentences:
Line 29-32: Therefore, it is desirable that bakery products have a balanced nutritional profile [1]. Among these, the most consumed one is the refined wheat flour bread [2].
Please add these papers in your references list and scale of two position the old references:
[1] Cappelli, A., Lupori, L., & Cini, E. Baking technology: A systematic review of machines and plants and their effect on final products, including improvement strategies. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 2021, 115, 275–284.
[2] Venturi, M., Cappelli, A., Pini, N., Galli, V., Lupori, L., Granchi, L., & Cini, E. Effects of kneading machine type and total element revolutions on dough rheology and bread characteristics: A focus on straight dough and indirect (biga) methods. LWT–Food Science and Technology, 2022, 153, 112500.
Response: We corrected and added new references according to the referee suggestions.
Referee comments: Line 39: please rephrase:
A successful alternative is the substitution of wheat flour with different legumes flours.
Line 49-50: …consumption is related to their alkaloids content (quinolizidine derivatives) that are toxic and harmful for human health.
Line 70-72: these sentence sound like an experimental result so or you move this sentence to the results and discussion section or you need to eliminate that. Alternatively, you can cite a paper that support your statement.
Line 79: Until today, only a few studies investigated the use of lupine…
Line 85: For this reasons, the aim….
Response: We corrected and added a new reference according to the referee suggestions.
Referee comments: Materials and methods: Line 93: please explain what mean type 650
Response: We completed the manuscript with the explanations in the results part (we defined 650 type).
Referee comments: Results: Very good job, I don’t have any suggestion here.
Response: Thank you very much for your appreciation.
Referee comments: Discussion:
Line 426: Cappelli. Please correct
Response: We corrected.
Referee comments: Line 425-427: this is true only for substitution with chickpea flour higher than 10%. Please specify it in the paper. The authors you cited found, instead, an increase of L values in the cause of substitution with 5% chickpea flour which improved also bread characteristics (in particular bread volume).
Response: We specified now in the paper according to the referee suggestions.
Referee comments: Line 517 and 532: moreover instead of more.
Response: We corrected.
Referee comments: In my opinion, only one additional explanation is needed: please explain how the lupine flour improved the bread characteristics (in particular bread volume), despite the reader can see a lowering of alveographic indexes (in particular W). Usually, we expect a worsening effect on bread characteristics when dough rheological properties decrease. You, instead, found an improvement of bread quality. Please explain better how and why in discussion section (rheology and bread characteristics sections).
Response: We completed in the manuscript additional explanations related to how the lupine flour improved the bread characteristics (in particular bread volume) despite a lowering of alveographic indexes (in particular W) to both discussion sections (rheology and bread characteristics ones).
Referee comments: Conclusions: Line 624: here and in the whole manuscript breadmaking not bread-making.
Response: We corrected in the whole manuscript.
Referee comments: Moreover, please correct as follow: …to the breadmaking recipe affected both the rheological properties of dough than the qualitative characteristics of bread.
Response: We corrected.
Referee comments: Line 639: remove had
Response: We removed.
Reviewer 2 Report
The study reports on the possibility of using germinated legume flour to improve the technological qualities of wheat flour during bread making. The work is interesting but needs some improvements.
Abstract, Line 9: "..... to improve it quality.....". Improve the quality of what? Bread or lupine flour? Specify.
Introduction, Line 32-35: "This is because..............". The sentence must be rewritten. as it is is not clear.
Materials and methods, Line 97-98: After germination, the lupine grains were freeze-dried with the rootlets? The authors must better define what the germinated lupine flour is made of.
Material and methods, Line 131-132: Falling number was determined on flours or dough? Authors must specify in this section.
Results: Flour characteristic, Line 200-204: Given the role of fiber and starch components on dough, it is appropriate to evaluate them both on flour and germinated lupine flour.
Results: Line 278. replace Figure 2 with Figure 3.
Results: Table 5. To better understand the color differences between control bread and other bread, it is advisable to also report in the table the color of the flour and the germinated lupine flour.
Material and methods: Line 127: replace fallowing with following
Results: Line 239: replace Rheoferementometer with Rheogementometer
Results: Line 521: replace leveles with level
Results: Line 584: replace firmeness with firmness
Results: Line 593: replace caron with carbon
Results: line 614: replace receipe with recipe
Results: line 620: replace it with its
Review punctuation throughout the text and read the final version by a native English speaker.
Author Response
3 March 2022
Dear Referee,
We would like to thank the referee for the close reading and for the proper suggestions. We hope that we provide all the answers to the reviewer’s comments.
Thank you very much for the recommendations to publish our paper entitled “Possibilities to Use Germinated Lupine Flour as an Ingredient in Bread Making in Order to improve it Quality”.
The present version of the paper has been revised according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
We uploaded the corrected version of the article for which we used the red color for the addition text.
REFERE COMMENTS:
Referee comments: The study reports on the possibility of using germinated legume flour to improve the technological qualities of wheat flour during bread making. The work is interesting but needs some improvements.
Response: We would like to thank to the referee for his/her close reading of our manuscript and for his/her appreciation. We made the improvements according to the referee suggestions.
Referee comments: Abstract, Line 9: "..... to improve it quality.....". Improve the quality of what? Bread or lupine flour? Specify.
Response: We corrected in the manuscript and we added in the manuscript that improve dough rheology and bread characteristics
Referee comments: Introduction, Line 32-35: "This is because..............". The sentence must be rewritten. as it is is not clear.
Response: We wanted to thank to the referee for his/her observations. We rewritten the sentence.
Referee comments: Materials and methods, Line 97-98: After germination, the lupine grains were freeze-dried with the rootlets? The authors must better define what the germinated lupine flour is made of.
Response: We defined in an extenso way what germinated lupine flour is made of.
Referee comments: Material and methods, Line 131-132: Falling number was determined on flours or dough? Authors must specify in this section.
Response: We specified in the manuscript now that the method is based on viscosity of the mix flour suspended in water. We made the evaluation according to the standard method ICC 107/1. It is well known that the Falling Number (FN) index value (expressed in seconds) is proportional to the viscosity and consequently inversely proportional to the amylase activity. It is a measure of the effect, rather than the actual amount, of amylase present. It is based on the rapid gelatinisation of flour suspended in water and measures the degradation of starch made available from α-amylase activity in rising temperature conditions similar to those of bread making.
Referee comments: Results: Flour characteristic, Line 200-204: Given the role of fiber and starch components on dough, it is appropriate to evaluate them both on flour and germinated lupine flour.
Response: We completed in the manuscript the values for carbohydrates content (which includes fiber and starch). We do not have any device in our faculty for fiber evaluation and the Megazyme kit for starch content. However, the carbohydrates content may be an indicator for these compounds.
Referee comments: Results: Line 278. replace Figure 2 with Figure 3.
Response: We replaced.
Referee comments: Results: Table 5. To better understand the color differences between control bread and other bread, it is advisable to also report in the table the color of the flour and the germinated lupine flour.
Response: We did not complete the color of the flour and germinated lupine flour in the manuscript since these data are not relevant for our study. During baking a lot of transformation occur which do not depend only on flour color they depend on a multitude of factors. For example, even if the flour is light in color, there are cases when it darkens during the technological process. This is due to the existence of the enzyme tyrosine, on the amino acid tyrosine, with the formation of melanin which are dark colored products. In addition, and other transformations may occur during the technological process of bread making that are not dependent on the color of the raw materials used in the technological process.
Referee comments: Material and methods: Line 127: replace fallowing with following
Response: We replaced.
Referee comments: Results: Line 239: replace Rheoferementometer with Rheogementometer
Response: We replaced.
Results: Line 521: replace leveles with level
Response: We replaced.
Referee comments: Line 584: replace firmeness with firmness
Response: We replaced.
Referee comments: Results: Line 593: replace caron with carbon
Response: We replaced.
Referee comments: Results: line 614: replace receipe with recipe
Response: We replaced.
Referee comments: line 620: replace it with its
Response: We replaced.
Referee comments: Review punctuation throughout the text and read the final version by a native English speaker.
Response: We revised.
Reviewer 3 Report
The Authors focused on the effect of germinated lupine flour addition into wheat flour on the physical parameters of technological value, i.e. rheological properties of dough during mixing and extension; fermentation and bread (bread volume, physical characteristics and texture profile and sensory analyses) as well as fundamental rheological properties. The aim of this study was to optimize the level of germinated lupine flour that should be added to obtain wheat bread of acceptable technological quality. It is a new research topic, rarely described by other authors.
Manuscript meets the requirements of the Agronomy Journal written in the Instruction for authors. Title is short and informative. Abstract includes an outline of the objective, method, results and conclusions of the paper. Introduction provide information on the present state of research in the field of germinated lupin flour nutritional value and possibillity use in breadmaking. Material and Methods are well described. Results are statistical evaluated and presented in six tables and five figures.
Discussion is clear and Authors comment obtained results with data published by other Authors. Cited references are current, 70% are written within the last 5 years. The article does not include an abnormal number of self-citations. Conclusion summarise the paper’s main points and outlines its contribution to the present state of research in the field concerned.
Remarks to the Paper:
- Figures properly show the data. However information provide on the axis of figure 1 and figure 2 should be improve. There is also no information which color of the curves is connected to the addition of GLF.
- Line 278 – it should be Figure 3 not Figure 2
- Bread color parameters should be written in italics (see: 3.4.2 and 4.3.2.)
- Line 593: instead of “caron dioxide” write “carbon dioxide”
- Line 189 - I suggest to add "of bread" after "the sensory characteristics"
- Line 226 - I suggest to add "(P/L)" after "the configuration ratio"
- Because of the significant influence of the addition of GLF on the lowering the quality of flour i.e. the water absorption, alveograph baking value and falling number, I suggest to add as the conclusion that addition of 15% GLF is correct to obtain good quality of bread only for wheat flour which characterized by a strong baking value and low α-amylase activity.
Author Response
3 March 2022
Dear Referee,
We would like to thank the referee for the close reading and for the proper suggestions. We hope that we provide all the answers to the reviewer’s comments.
Thank you very much for the recommendations to publish our paper entitled “Possibilities to Use Germinated Lupine Flour as an Ingredient in Bread Making in Order to improve it Quality”.
The present version of the paper has been revised according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
We uploaded the corrected version of the article for which we used the red color for the addition text.
REFERE COMMENTS:
Referee comments: The Authors focused on the effect of germinated lupine flour addition into wheat flour on the physical parameters of technological value, i.e. rheological properties of dough during mixing and extension; fermentation and bread (bread volume, physical characteristics and texture profile and sensory analyses) as well as fundamental rheological properties. The aim of this study was to optimize the level of germinated lupine flour that should be added to obtain wheat bread of acceptable technological quality. It is a new research topic, rarely described by other authors.
Response: We would like to thank to the referee for his/her close reading of our manuscript and for his/her appreciation.
Referee comments: Manuscript meets the requirements of the Agronomy Journal written in the Instruction for authors. Title is short and informative. Abstract includes an outline of the objective, method, results and conclusions of the paper. Introduction provide information on the present state of research in the field of germinated lupin flour nutritional value and possibillity use in breadmaking. Material and Methods are well described. Results are statistical evaluated and presented in six tables and five figures.
Response: We would like to thank to the referee for his/her close reading of our manuscript and for his/her appreciation.
Referee comments: Discussion is clear and Authors comment obtained results with data published by other Authors. Cited references are current, 70% are written within the last 5 years. The article does not include an abnormal number of self-citations. Conclusion summarise the paper’s main points and outlines its contribution to the present state of research in the field concerned.
Response: We would like to thank to the referee for his/her close reading of our manuscript and for his/her appreciation.
Referee comments: Remarks to the Paper:
- Figures properly show the data. However information provide on the axis of figure 1 and figure 2 should be improve. There is also no information which color of the curves is connected to the addition of GLF.
Response: We improved the informations provided on the axis of figure 1 and 2. The information related on the curve color are given on the description of the figure below the figure.
- Line 278 – it should be Figure 3 not Figure 2
Response: We corrected.
- Bread color parameters should be written in italics (see: 3.4.2 and 4.3.2.)
Response: We corrected.
- Line 593: instead of “caron dioxide” write “carbon dioxide”
Response: We corrected
- Line 189 - I suggest to add "of bread" after "the sensory characteristics"
Response: We added.
- Line 226 - I suggest to add "(P/L)" after "the configuration ratio"
Response: We added.
- Because of the significant influence of the addition of GLF on the lowering the quality of flour i.e. the water absorption, alveograph baking value and falling number, I suggest to add as the conclusion that addition of 15% GLF is correct to obtain good quality of bread only for wheat flour which characterized by a strong baking value and low α-amylase activity.
Response: We added.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors responded to the Reviewer's requests.
Accept the manuscript in its present form.
