research paper on gluten free bread

Texture profile analysis and sensory evaluation of commercially available gluten-free bread samples

Original Paper
Open access
Published: 19 March 2022
Volume 248 , pages 1447–1455, ( 2022 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

Marcell Tóth ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3214-3802 1 ,
Tímea Kaszab 1 &
Anikó Meretei 1

9142 Accesses

15 Citations

Explore all metrics

The need for better quality gluten-free (GF) bread is constantly growing. This can be ascribed to the rising incidence of celiac disease or other gluten-associated allergies and the widespread incorrect public belief, that GF diet is healthier. Although there is a remarkable scientific interest shown to this topic, among the numerous studies only a few deals with commercially available products. The gap between research and commercial reality is already identified and communicated from a nutritional point of view, but up to date texture studies of commercial GF breads are underrepresented. In this study, 9 commercially available GF bread were compared to their wheat-based counterparts from texture and sensory viewpoints. Results showed that among GF loaves products, some performed significantly better at hardness and springiness attributes during the 4-day-long storage test compared to the wheat-based products. Two of GF cob breads performed significantly better or on the same level as the wheat-based cob regarding to hardness and cohesiveness during 3 days. Among sensorial properties mouth-feel, softness and smell were evaluated as significantly better or similarly for some GF versus wheat-based products. Two GF bread had more salty taste which reduced the flavor experience. Both the texture and sensory data of the storage test indicate that the quality of some GF bread products has significantly improved in the recent years; they stayed comparable with their wheat-based counterparts even for a 4-day-long storage period.

Semi‐volume gluten‐free bread: effect of guar gum, sodium caseinate and transglutaminase enzyme on the quality parameters

Technological Aspects of Gluten Free Bread

Gluten-Free Breadmaking: Facts, Issues, and Future

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

However, Celiac disease (CD) was already mentioned by Aretaeus of Cappadocia probably in the second century (AD) [ 1 ], it became an emphasized scientific and commercially important topic in the last decades. The consumption of gluten-free (GF) products is significantly increasing, just as the demand for good-quality GF products [ 2 ]. The underlying reason for the expanded interest can be attributed to better diagnostical methods of CD, wheat allergy, non-celiac gluten sensitivity and dermatitis herpetiformis [ 3 , 4 ], and to the widespread incorrect public belief that GFD is healthier [ 5 ].

Gluten—as a term used to encompass prolamin proteins—can be found in wheat, barley and rye, including all their subtypes and genus [ 6 ]. It is the key structure-forming protein, which is the most common and important protein ingredient in the bakery industry. Absence of gluten in the GF formulation ends up with much weaker gas-holding properties; therefore, it causes low loaf volume [ 7 ], crumbling texture, poor color [ 8 ], choky dry mouth-feel and shorter shelf life [ 9 , 10 , 11 ].

Consumer survey studies revealed that the consumers are satisfied with the quality of GF sweets, biscuits and pasta, but still significant improvement is needed in GF bread and cakes to meet the consumers’ expectations [ 12 , 13 , 14 ]. The constantly growing number of published articles shows that several approaches were studied mostly using different modified starches, pseudocereals, enzymes, protein supplementation and/or hydrocolloids to improve the quality and nutritional properties of GF flours and breads [ 6 , 15 ]. Among these numerous studies, only a few deals with commercially available products, the majority rather focuses on self-made prototypes from different raw materials. The publications that are based on commercial products concentrate on composition, nutrition values and/or prices. Based on their detailed and thorough study by examining 228 commercial products Roman et al. [ 12 ] declared a gap between commercial reality and research. Studying the ingredient list of breads they noticed that the commercial breads do not seek to use one single starch or gluten replacer, but a combination of several ingredients to optimize bread quality (hydrocolloids, acidifiers, emulsifiers, leavening agents, preservatives, and aromas or flavorings). They observed that some ingredients which have momentous attention and focus in the scientific world (e.g., pseudocereals) are hardly used in commercial products. On the UK market, GF products are 159% more expensive than their regular version, most GF bread and flour products contain higher amount of salt, fat and sugar, while some GF products are lower in fiber and protein content [ 16 ]. Similar differences were found on the Italian market [ 17 , 18 ]. Spanish market sample study revealed that sodium, fat and cholesterol content were significantly higher in 20 commercial GF bread samples due to having egg, different oils like coconut, olive, sunflower, palm [ 19 ]. Although it is true that dietary fiber and sugar levels are more adequate than in the past, the GF diet might lead to CD patients’ inadequate intake of fats, proteins, sodium and vitamins [ 20 ].

In general, it can be declared that GF products are significantly more expensive compared to their wheat-based counterparts, and their on-shelf availability can be limited [ 21 , 22 , 23 ].

The studies mentioned above, give important and valuable information for the scientific community and draw attention to the gap between research and commercial reality. Despite the fact that this gap is already identified and communicated from a nutritional point of view and regarding ingredients, up to date rheological studies are hardly available dealing with commercial GF breads (Table 1 ).

Considering the rapid and constant development and changes in the GF bakery industry (ingredients, technologies, consumer needs), more and more GF bakeries are appearing on the market and selling freshly baked, preservative-free bread products. These products are based on different ingredients and recipes, but trying to be comparable with the gluten containing products in terms of lookalike, size, taste and shelf life. Therefore, it would be essential to continuously examine the textural and sensory properties of the GF freshly baked and sold bread products available on the different local markets. Following this approach, the current study aims to compare these GF commercially available, preservative-free bread products with their gluten containing wheat flour-based counterparts, focusing on their texture and sensory properties.

Materials and methods

Bread samples.

The studied 9 different GF commercial bread samples were purchased from different specialized GF bakeries, while the wheat-based products from a supermarket. All the samples were selected with the aim to compare them regarding the product’s name, appearance and packaging. Special attention was taken to ensure that the products did not contain preservatives and gas or modified atmosphere in the packaging. In this study, three types of bread were selected: cob (artisan, round shaped bread), white and wholegrain loaf (baked in loaf tin). From each bread type, GF and wheat-based products were selected and compared (Table 2 ).

All the samples considered in this study were sliced and ready to eat, without prior heating requirement. Ingredients and nutrition values of the samples which were noted on the product’s packaging are presented in Table 3 .

Texture measurement

Texture profile analysis (TPA) was performed at room temperature using Stable Micro Systems TA.XT2. Samples were taken and measured from the first, middle and last third of the sliced bread products, doing 7 different measurements on different slices of the same bread sample. The measurement was placed on the middle of the bread slices, avoiding region near to the crust. Each bread slice had 12 mm thickness. The applied settings were 35 mm diametric acryl cylindrical probe, 50% strain, 5 mm/sec crosshead speed and 5 s of waiting time between the two measurements. Firmness, cohesiveness and springiness were the main representative parameters of the sample texture. Results obtained from the GF and wheat bread samples were compared and followed up.

Sensory evaluation

During the sensory evaluation group of 15 people (13 females and 2 males, aged between 22 and 47 years) tested the bread samples. The ethical statement for the study was applied from the Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences and informed consent was obtained from each subject prior to their participation in the study. Subjects confirmed not having any known gluten, rye, milk protein, egg or lactose consumption-related disorder. All participants were recognized as regular bread consumers, consuming bread at least once per day.

The assessors received 1 full slice of the sample without any spreading, and were asked to appraise the intensity of 17 sensory attributes, which were described as relevant ones for GF bread by Pagliarini et al. [ 34 ] to cover appearance, color, taste and texture. For evaluation purpose a continuous, unstructured 10 cm long line scale with extremes at the ends (absolutely not intense and immensely intense) was used for every attribute. Samples were served with 3-digit codes on white plastic plates under white light at room temperature.

Data analysis

Received data were analyzed with IBM SPSS Statistics 25.0.2.2 software. Significant difference between the measured groups was determined by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with 95% confidence level. Tukey HSD test was used after normality and standard deviation homogeneity test. Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) was performed to examine the separability of each bread type. Sensorial test data were analyzed by ANOVA. When there is significant difference, Tukey test was applied using a level of 5% of significance.

Results and discussion

Nutritional values of the bread samples.

In line with the previously published data, the examined GF bread samples contained different starches, hydrocolloids, fibers and protein supplements all at the same time. The type of starches (corn, tapioca, potato, and rice) and hydrocolloids (HPMC, guar gum, xanthan gum) were the most commonly used ones among various GF breads on different markets [ 12 , 17 ]. The fiber and salt content of C1, WL1 and WG1 samples were higher while the protein content was lower than in their wheat-based counterparts. Lower protein level was also detected for GF breads previously [ 12 ], but in this case of C1, WL1, WG1 samples according to the statement on the manufacturer’s website keeping the protein level low was a conscious decision, so their products can be used for people diagnosed with phenylketonuria (PKU) as well. People with PKU have to follow a low protein and phenylalanine containing diet [ 35 ]; therefore, these products are suitable not just for celiac people. Following gluten-free option as dietary practice is known and should be followed [ 36 ]. The energy and carbohydrate values were similar between the GF and wheat-based samples expect for WL2, which had the lowest level of energy and carbohydrate level among all the samples.

Texture profile changes

Results of the TPA measurements during the shelf-life test are presented in Table 4 . Overall, it can be seen that C2 sample had significantly ( p < 0.05) higher hardness but lower cohesiveness during the whole study. C1 was significantly softer on day 1, but not different from CW on the following days. C3 showed non-significant difference in hardness from CW during the whole study. Among the GF white loaf samples compared to WLW, WL1 was significantly lower in hardness except on day 3, while WL2 was also significantly softer versus WLW except for day 2. WL3 after day 1 was not significantly different from WLW. In case of whole grain loaves, on day 1 all the GF samples were significantly softer than WGW. On the following days, there were no significant difference detected among them, except for day 3, when WG1 was significantly softer versus WGW.

High cohesiveness leads to no disintegration during mastication, in case of low cohesiveness the bread crumbles [ 37 ]. Crumbling texture of GF bread during storage test was reported in the last decades, raising awareness as a general quality issue of these products [ 38 ]. Moore et al. [ 25 ] experienced decrease in cohesiveness ( p < 0.01) in GF bread samples after a two-day storage. In this study, all the GF white loaf samples had significantly higher cohesiveness during the storage test versus the wheat-based white loaf sample. In case of whole grain samples, WG1 was not significantly different in cohesiveness from WGW. WG2 and WG3 samples showed significantly higher values compared to WGW until day 4, when only WG2 was different. Among cob samples C2 and C3 were significantly different from CW, and in general C2 was different from the other cob samples during the whole study.

In bread, springiness is associated with freshness, and products with low values are linked with crumb brittleness [ 27 ]; therefore, having high springiness values during the shelf life is desired. In this study WL2 sample showed significantly ( p < 0.05) lower springiness during the 4-day-long storage test compared to all other bread samples. Despite the level of springiness grew day by day, but on the 4th day, it could barely reach 80%, still being more rigid. During the storage test, WL3 had significantly higher springiness values versus WLW sample, while WL1 was significantly better or comparable with WLW. Among the whole grain samples, WG2 showed higher springiness values every day compared to WGW, while WG1 and WG3 were better or comparable with WGW. Within the cob samples only on day 1 C1 showed significantly lower springiness value, but on the other days all the GF cob samples were comparable with the wheat-based cob.

Resilience characterizes the beginning of a sample’s elasticity and calculated from the ratio of the area under curve of the second half of the first cycle to the first half of the cycle. Reduction in springiness and resilience reflects alteration of the crumb elasticity [ 39 ]. The GF white loaves and the GF whole grain samples showed higher ( p < 0.05) resilience values compared to their wheat-based counterparts. This is in line with the springiness values, where the GF samples had higher or comparable values. In case of the cob samples, C3 always had higher ( p < 0.05) values than CW, C1 on days 1 and 4, while C2 was all the way consentaneous with CW.

According to the results, C1, C3, WL1, WL3, WG1, WG2 and WG3 bread samples in general can be described as soft and spongy [ 33 ] as they had comparable or lower hardness, higher springiness and resilience values than their wheat-based counterparts. From cohesiveness point of view the mentioned samples performed better or comparable to their wheat-based counterparts.

LDA results (Fig. 1 ) showed that WLW and WGW samples were classified as different groups from the others during the whole storage test. The significant difference in cohesiveness and resilience for both group, the springiness of WLW and the hardness of WGW attributes led together to show these samples as different product groups from the others.

LDA results of the storage test ( a with all samples; b without C2 sample; c without C2 and WL2 samples)

Due to its hardness results C2 was also classified as a separate group (Fig. 1 a), and WL2 because of its springiness and resilience attribute (Fig. 1 b). LDA result without these two groups (Fig. 1 c) showed an overlap between C1 and CW samples (79.3% of cross-validated grouped cases were correctly classified). This result clearly showed that the quality and texture profile attribute changes of C1 during a 4-day-long storage test were as good as the highest quality wheat-based product’s considered to be artisan.

Mean ratings (given in cm) for the 17 sensory descriptors of the 12 bread samples are presented in Table 5 . Less homogeneous crumb porosity for GF bread samples were previously reported [ 40 , 41 ], which was linked to high starch and low protein content, impacting the dough interfacial properties and rheological attributes. Pagliarini et al. [ 34 ] found commercial GF bread product with uniform crumb porosity but with higher protein value. The commercial GF samples included in the study had significantly lower protein content versus the wheat-based ones, but received as high or even significantly higher values for crumb homogeneity perception. The reason for that could be linked to more effective protein supplements and/or better understanding of starch–protein–hydrocolloid interactions.

From crumb color behavior point of view, participants found this attribute at same or more intense level than their wheat-based counterparts, except for WL3 and WG3. This result showed that it was achievable with the combination of GF ingredients like starches (corn, tapioca, rice), pseudocereals (amaranth, buckwheat) and fibers (apple, potato, psyllium) to create crumb color for GF breads, which was typical for the wheat-based counterparts, and preferable even for non-celiac consumers. However, the exact ratio just based on the ingredient list information could not be determined. The improvement of crumb and crust color intensity indicating that appearance, as one of the most important factors at bread purchasing had significantly improved in the last decade in the case of fresh baked GF breads.

One of the biggest struggle with GF bread formulations had been their flavor. GF products were often described as having dry, tasteless or unpleasantly strong corny taste [ 15 , 17 , 27 , 34 ]. In this study the GF samples did not have type-unusual corny and cheesy flavor and/or odor. From taste point of view, the two most dominant difference were detected by the saltiness of C1 and the sweetness of WGW. Latter can be explained with the highest level of added sugar (3.8 g/100 g).

WLW was characterized by the most intense fermented taste and smell, which was probably due to the presence of sourdough.

Concerning texture properties, sensory results were in line with the instrumental measurements. The link between hardness and springiness measurement and softness scores was confirmed, they strengthened each other. C2 sample was the hardest during all days, which was reflected in the sensory test as well with the least intense softness value. WL2 sample is not just hard, but also rubbery. However, the exact level of ingredients was not mentioned on the labels, which can be linked to a higher level of hydrocolloids.

In general, checking all the texture properties together, C1, WL1 and WG1 samples were performing at the same level or better ( p < 0.0.5) compared to their wheat-based counterparts.

This study aims to provide up to date data regarding the so far neglected topic of texture and sensory aspects of commercially available, freshly baked, preservative-free GF bread products designed for celiac consumers. Results show that the market has the ability to produce preservative-free, ready-to-eat bread products with comparable texture properties and attributes to their wheat-based counterparts during storage at room temperature. The higher fiber and the comparable or even lower energy and carbohydrates values decrease the gap in the nutrition area between GF and wheat-based bread products. In the future, it would be important that shelf-life studies aiming to evaluate the texture and sensory qualities of GF bread samples would concentrate on the commercially available GF products and in that case, these results and parameters could be used as reference. If the focus would shift more to the commercially available GF products, it would become more apparent that these products are not as low quality anymore. The hardness, springiness and cohesiveness data of the storage test prove the very opposite, the quality of these products has significantly improved during the last few years.

Availability of data and material

Data which support the outcome of the study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Tekiner H (2015) Aretaeus of Cappadocia and his treatises on diseases. Turk Neurosurg 25:508–512

PubMed Google Scholar

Gobbetti M, Pontonio E, Filannino P, Rizzello CG, De Angelis M, Di Cagno R (2018) How to improve the gluten-free diet: the state of the art from a food science perspective. Food Res Int 110:22–32

Article Google Scholar

Ludvigsson JF, Leffler DA, Bai JC, Biagi F, Fasano A, Green PH, Hadjivassiliou M, Kaukinen K, Kelly CP, Leonard JN, Lundin KE, Murray JA, Sanders DS, Walker MM, Zingone F, Ciacci C (2013) The Oslo definitions for coeliac disease and related terms. Gut 62:43–52

Ortiz C, Valenzuela R, Lucero AY (2017) Celiac disease, non celiac gluten sensitivity and wheat allergy: comparison of 3 different diseases triggered by the same food. Rev Chil Pediatr 88:417–423

Hartmann C, Hieke S, Taper C, Siegrist M (2018) European consumer healthiness evaluation of ‘free-from’ labelled food products. Food Qual Pref 68:377–388

Capriles DV, Areas GJA (2014) Novel approaches in gluten-free breadmaking: Interface between Food Science, Nutrition, and Health. Compr Rev in Food Sci Food Saf 13:871–890

Article CAS Google Scholar

Elgeti D, Jeckle M, Becker T (2015) Strategies for the aeration of gluten-free bread—a review. Trends in Food Sci Technol 46:75–84

Conte P, Del Caro A, Balestra F, Piga A, Fadda C (2018) Bee pollen as a functional ingredient in gluten-free bread: A physical-chemical, technological and sensory approach. LWT Food Sci Technol 90:1–7

Ronda F, Perez-Quirce S, Villanueva M (2017). Rheological properties of gluten-free bread doughs: relationship with bread quality. Adv Food Rheol Appl 297–334

Martínez MM, Gómez M (2017) Rheological and microstructural evolution of the most common gluten-free flours and starches during bread fermentation and baking. J Food Eng 197:78–86

Rybicka I, Doba K, Binczak O (2019) Improving the sensory and nutritional value of gluten-free bread. Int J Food Sci Technol 54:2661–2667

Roman L, Belorio M, Gomez M (2019) Gluten-free breads: the gap between research and commercial reality. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf 18:690–702

Ozola L, Straumite E (2014) Characteristic of gluten-free products: Latvian consumer survey. Int J Nutr Food Eng 8:1848–1852

Google Scholar

Potter R, Stojceska V, Plunkett A (2014) An investigation of the consumer perception on the quality of the gluten and wheat free breads available on the UK market. J Food Meas 8:362–372

Capelli A, Oliva N, Cini E (2020) A systematic review of gluten-free dough and bread: dough rheology, bread characteristics, and improvement strategies. Appl Sci 10:6559

Fry L, Madden AM, Fallaize R (2018) An investigation into the nutritional composition and cost of gluten-free versus regular food products in the UK. J Human Nutr Diet 31:108–120

Foschia M, Horstmann S, Arendt EK, Zannini E (2016) Nutritional therapy - Facing the gap between coeliac disease and gluten-free food. Int J Food Microbiol 239:113–124

Cornicelli M, Saba M, Machello N, Silano M, Neuhold S (2018) Nutritional composition of gluten-free food versus regular food sold in the Italian market. Dig Liver Dis 50:1305–1308

Tres A, Tarnovska N, Varona E (2020) Determination and comparison of the lipid profile and sodium content of gluten-free and gluten-containing breads from the Spanish market. Plant Foods Hum Nutr 75:344–354

Melini V, Melini F (2019) Gluten-free diet: gaps and needs for a healthier diet. Nutrients 11:170

Missbach B, Schwingshackl L, Billmann A, Mystek A, Hickelsberger M, Bauer G, König J (2015) Gluten-free food database: the nutritional quality and cost of packaged gluten-free foods. PeerJ 3:e1337

Jamieson JA, Gougeon L (2017) Gluten-free foods in rural maritime provinces: limited availability, high price, and low iron content. Can J Diet Prac Res 78:192–196

MohdFauad SNA, Kaur S, Shafie SR (2020) Nutritional composition and cost differences between gluten-free and gluten-containing food products in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Mal J Med Health Sci 16:178–183

Gallagher E, Gormley TR, Arendt EK (2003) Crust and crumb characteristics of gluten free breads. J Food Eng 56:153–161

Moore MM, Schober TJ, Dockery P, Arendt EK (2004) Textural comparisons of gluten-free and wheat-based doughs, batters, and breads. Cereal Chem 81:567–575

Hager AS, Wolter A, Czerny M, Bez J, Zannini E, Arendt EK (2012) Investigation of product quality, sensory profile and ultrastructure of breads made from a range of commercial gluten-free flours compared to their wheat counterparts. Eur Food Res Technol 235:333–344

Matos ME, Rosell CM (2012) Relationship between instrumental parameters and sensory characteristics in gluten-free breads. Eur Food Res Technol 235:107–117

Mariotti M, Pagani MA, Lucisano M (2013) The role of buckwheat and HPMC on the breadmaking properties of some commercial gluten-free bread mixtures. Food Hydrocoll 30:393–400

Wolter A, Hager AS, Zannini E, Arendt EK (2014) Influence of sourdough on in vitro starch digestibility and predicted glycemic indices of gluten-free breads. Food Funct 5:564–572

Mazzeo T, Brambillasca F, Pellegrini N, Valmarana R, Corti F, Colombo C, Agostoni C (2014) Evaluation of visual and taste preferences of some gluten-free commercial products in a group of celiac children. Int J Food Sci Nutr 65:112–116

Paciulli M, Rinaldi M, Cirlini M, Scazzina F, Chiavaro E (2016) Chestnut flour addition in commercial gluten-free bread: a shelf-life study. LWT Food Sci Technol 70:88–95

Feizollahi E, Mirmoghtadaie L, Mohammadifar MA, Jazaeri S, Hadaegh H, Nazari B, Lalegani S (2018) Sensory, digestion, and texture quality of commercial gluten-free bread: impact of broken rice flour type. J Texture Stud 49:395–403

Puerta P, Laguna L, Villegas B, Rizo A, Fiszman S, Tarrega A (2020) Oral processing and dynamics of texture perception in commercial gluten-free breads. Food Res Int 134:109233

Pagliarini E, Laureati M, Lavelli V (2010) Sensory evaluation of gluten-free breads assessed by a trained panel of celiac assessors. Eur Food Res Technol 231:37–46

Parlak O, Dundar AN (2021) Production of low protein and gluten-free cookies for phenylketonuria (PKU) and/or celiac patients. Czech J Food Sci 39:29–34

MacDonald A, van Wegberg AMJ, Ahring K, Beblo S, Bélanger-Quintana A, Burlina A, Campistol J et al (2020) PKU dietary handbook to accompany PKU guidelines. J Rare Dis 15:171

CAS Google Scholar

Onyango C, Mutungi C, Unbehend G, Lindhauer MG (2011) Modification of gluten-free sorghum batter and bread using maize, potato, cassava or rice starch. LWT Food Sci Technol 44:681–686

Naqash F, Gani A, Gani A, Masoodi FA (2017) Gluten-free baking: combating the chellenges—a review. Trends Food Sci Technol 66:98–107

Onyango C, Mutungi C, Unbehend G, Lindhauer MG (2010) Rheological and baking characteristics of batter and bread prepared from pregelatinized cassava starch and sorghum and modified suing microbial transglutaminase. J Food Eng 97:465–470

Pruska-Kedzior A, Kedzior Z, Goracy M, Pietrowska K, Przybylska A, Spychalska K (2008) Comparison of rheological, fermentative and baking properties of gluten-free dough formulations. Eur Food Res Technol 227:1523–1536

Witczak T, Juszczak L, Ziobro R, Korus J (2017) Rheology of gluten-free dough and physical characteristics of bread with potato protein. J Food Process Eng 40:1–21

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors appreciated Barbara Pém and Nikolett Lázár for their high-level assistance in proofreading and editing. The authors acknowledge the Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences’ Doctoral School of Food Science for the support in this study.

Open access funding provided by Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Institute of Food Science and Technology, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Budapest, Hungary

Marcell Tóth, Tímea Kaszab & Anikó Meretei

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcell Tóth .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

Authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Compliance with ethics requirements

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects.

Ethical approval

Ethics approval was not required for this study.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Tóth, M., Kaszab, T. & Meretei, A. Texture profile analysis and sensory evaluation of commercially available gluten-free bread samples. Eur Food Res Technol 248 , 1447–1455 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-021-03944-2

Download citation

Received : 20 October 2021

Revised : 13 December 2021

Accepted : 18 December 2021

Published : 19 March 2022

Issue Date : June 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-021-03944-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Gluten-free bread
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings
My Bibliography
Collections
Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

Create a new collection
Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

Search in PubMed
Search in NLM Catalog
Add to Search

Recent practical researches in the development of gluten-free breads

Affiliation.

1 Food Research Institute, National Agriculture and Food Research Organization, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8642 Japan.
PMID: 31304279
PMCID: PMC6550274
DOI: 10.1038/s41538-019-0040-1

Wheat bread is consumed globally and has played a critical role in the story of civilization since the development of agriculture. While the aroma and flavor of this staple food continue to delight and satisfy most people, some individuals have a specific allergy to wheat or a genetic disposition to celiac disease. To improve the quality of life of these patients from a dietary standpoint, food-processing researchers have been seeking to develop high-quality gluten-free bread. As the quality of wheat breads depends largely on the viscoelastic properties of gluten, various ingredients have been employed to simulate its effects, such as hydrocolloids, transglutaminase, and proteases. Recent attempts have included the use of redox regulation as well as particle-stabilized foam. In this short review, we introduce the ongoing advancements in the development of gluten-free bread, by our laboratory as well as others, focusing mainly on rice-based breads. The social and scientific contexts of these efforts are also mentioned.

Keywords: Nutrition; Technology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interestsThe author declares that the author has no competing interests.

Comparison of the swelling mechanism…

Comparison of the swelling mechanism ( a ) and appearance ( b )…

Explanatory figure of particle emulsion/foam.…

Explanatory figure of particle emulsion/foam. Adapted from refs. , . Scale bar: 30…

Summary of the procedures for…

Summary of the procedures for making additive-free rice bread and “cooking tips” for…

Publication types

Search in MeSH

Related information

Linkout - more resources, full text sources.

Europe PubMed Central
Nature Publishing Group
PubMed Central

Research Materials

NCI CPTC Antibody Characterization Program

Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
Review Article
Open access
Published: 01 May 2019

Recent practical researches in the development of gluten-free breads

Hiroyuki Yano ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0910-854X 1

npj Science of Food volume 3 , Article number: 7 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

26k Accesses

41 Citations

5 Altmetric

Metrics details

Sustainable plant-based ingredients as wheat flour substitutes in bread making

Strategies to improve wheat for human health

Physico-chemical properties of an innovative gluten-free, low-carbohydrate and high protein-bread enriched with pea protein powder

Introduction.

The aroma emanating from a bread bakery is unmistakably alluring. The flavor and crunchy texture of wheat breads sharpen our appetite and satisfy our basic human cravings for comfort as well as nutrition. Indeed, human beings are so enchanted by bread that it is much more than a “staple food”; it has been called “the staff of life”. Breadmaking has a long and fascinating story. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 It is generally accepted that breadmaking dates back to the New Stone Age, from 8000 to 10,000 BC, and originated around the Fertile Crescent and consisted of emmer and einkorn wheat grains. 1 At first the grains were consumed as porridge. Then, grains that had been hand-crushed using knocking stones were mixed with water and baked on a heated stone with a cover of hot ash, resulting in an unfermented, flat bread. Later, around 6000 BC, people in southern Mesopotamia started using sourdough, 5 speculated to have been developed accidently in an abandoned mixture of flour and water. This first leavened bread dough, which contained fermentation gas, swelled up in the baking process. In ~3000 BC, the Egyptians improved bread by adding yeast, developing what would become the prototype of modern bread. They dehulled and milled wheat grains using saddle querns, the most ancient type of quern stones, 6 which were later replaced by rotary querns and are used even today. Breadmaking and beer production in Egypt are closely related and are considered evidence of a high degree of civilization. 7 Bread was made not only with flour prepared from raw grains, but sometimes also with malt (germinated grains). Moreover, water with a blend of cooked and uncooked malt was used in brewing. The mixture was strained free of husk before inoculation with yeast.

The precise origin of bread has still not been determined. Recent reports show archaeobotanical evidence that the origins of bread date back to 14,400 years ago. 8 Progress in archaeology will eventually clarify the origin of bread, along with some sense of how bread fits into the larger culture of ancient civilizations. Wheat bread is now one of the most representative food in the world. A unique property of wheat gluten realizes bread with high quality. However, some genetically predisposed people cannot eat wheat bread, because gluten causes harmful reactions to them. In this short review, we will summarize the gluten-dependent swelling mechanism of wheat bread and the recent scientific effort to make bread without gluten.

Modern wheat breadmaking

Simply stated, breadmaking is composed of three steps: mixing/sheeting, fermenting, and baking processes. 9 In the mixing process, wheat flour, water, yeast, sugar, salt, oil, and other components are mixed and kneaded. Here, the ingredients are blended homogeneously and hydrated, resulting in the development of the all-important gluten network. 10 Gluten is made from two major wheat proteins together comprising 85% of wheat endosperm protein: gliadin and glutenin. Kneading of wheat dough promotes the hydrogen bonding and disulfide cross-linking interactions of these proteins, eventually producing a viscoelastic and highly conformational protein network termed “gluten”. 11 Yeast grows fast in the dough, feeding on supplemental sugar, until it consumes all available oxygen. Then, it shifts metabolism from aerobic respiration to anaerobic fermentation. In the subsequent fermentation process, yeast generates fermentation gas, mainly composed of carbon dioxide and other components, such as ethanol:

In wheat dough, the gas is confined in the continuous “gluten matrix”, 12 which is composed of the viscoelastic gluten network and other components, such as starch granules and water (Fig. 1a ). Thus, in the beginning of the fermentation process, many small gas cells are produced throughout the dough, like so many small balloons. As the fermentation proceeds, each small gas cell grows bigger, and the dough rises. In the following baking process, the gas cell inflates further by heat, resulting in the expansion, namely, “oven spring” of the dough. 13 The starch molecules are gelatinized by heat, so that the gluten matrix forming the envelopes of the “balloons” become hardened, thus constructing the stable crumb framework. 14 Concurrently, the crust, or surface of the bread dough, is hardened as well as browned by the Maillard reaction between the sugars and amino acids. 15 Finally, the breadmaking is completed, emitting a fresh aroma. 16

Comparison of the swelling mechanism ( a ) and appearance ( b ) of fermenting wheat dough and additive-free, gluten-free (GF) rice batter

The preparation of ingredients, especially flour, is also a critical step. Wheat grain is composed mainly of three parts: the endosperm, germ, and bran. 17 In the endosperm, which is the major constituent of the polished grain, starch granules are embedded in a protein matrix. 18 Wheat flour is produced by grinding whole-wheat grains or polished ones mechanically. 19 Impact mills, such as hammer mills and pin mills, accomplish particle size reduction by exposing seeds to a set of rotating hammer or pins that fracture the seeds, while roller and stone mills compress the seeds between two hardened surfaces. 20 During the milling of wheat grains, a portion of the starch granules are mechanically damaged. 21 The extent of the damage depends on wheat variety (hard or soft type) as well as milling conditions. In the mixing and fermentation steps of breadmaking, damaged starch accelerates the absorption of water to the starch granules, resulting in the activation of local amylases, leading to the degradation of starch molecules into dextrin and maltose. 22 Consequently, yeast activity and the final bread volume is increased. However, excessive starch damage produces wet or sticky dough and bread with poor quality. Thus, control of flour quality in terms of the starch damage is critical in the milling industry. 23

In other words, intact and damaged starch granules each have their respective role in the making of wheat bread—and, as we will show, in rice-flour breads as well. In the case of wheat dough, intact starch granules constitute the gluten matrix, while damaged ones activate fermentation. Generally, the extent of starch damage in commercially available wheat flours is 10–15%. 19

Social demand for gluten-free food

Gluten intolerance.

While the unique viscoelastic property of gluten realizes wheat bread with high quality, some people choose to or must follow a gluten-free diet. Recent reviews well summarize the background and status quo of gluten-free diets, 24 , 25 so only the outline will be mentioned here. Gluten intolerance includes autoimmune celiac disease (CD), wheat allergy, and non-celiac gluten sensitivity (NCGS). Celiac disease is an autoimmune disorder caused by genetic as well as environmental factors. 26 In CD patients, ingestion of gluten leads to small intestinal damage, typically leading to malabsorption. Its prevalence in the United States and Europe is estimated to reach about 1%. Gluten protein has protease-resistant regions in its structure. 27 Digestion of gluten in the human gastrointestinal tract generates “pathogenic” peptides that occasionally reach the lamina propria, where the peptides are deamidated by local transglutaminase. 28 The modified gluten peptides have a higher affinity to human leukocyte antigen (HLA)–DQ2 as well as HLA–DQ8 molecules, 29 which are present only in the small percentage of people carrying the HLA–DQ2 or the DQ8 haplotype. 30 This bonding results in the presentation of the gluten peptides to T cells, thereby triggering further malignant immune response in those with CD. In addition, tissue transglutaminase cross-links covalently to gliadin molecules. The protein complexes with new epitopes are considered to trigger the primary immune response as well. Antibodies against tissue transglutaminase are characteristic of CD. 31

In contrast, food allergy to wheat is characterized by T helper type 2 (Th2) activation, which can result in immunoglobulin E (IgE) and non-IgE-mediated reactions. 32 The IgE-mediated wheat allergy reactions usually occur immediately after contact of wheat, and are characterized by the occurrence of wheat-specific IgE antibodies in serum. Ingestion of wheat causes food allergy, while inhalation of wheat causes respiratory allergy to genetically predisposed individuals. A food allergy to wheat may cause a life-threatening reaction, such as anaphylaxis and wheat-dependent, exercise-induced anaphylaxis. 33 In contrast, repetitive exposure to wheat flour may cause baker’s asthma or rhinitis, mostly characterized as occupational allergic diseases. 34 Non-IgE- mediated food allergy reactions to wheat usually occur hours or even days after ingestion of wheat products and are characterized by chronic eosinophilic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract. 35 There is a variability among reports of wheat allergy prevalence due to the differences in the diagnostic criteria, methodology, age, and geography. 36 The prevalence of wheat allergy is estimated to be 0.9% in the United Kingdom (based on questionnaire response), 37 3.6% in the United States (based on measurement of anti-wheat-specific IgE antibodies), 38 and 0.2% in Japan (based on a combination of questionnaire-based examination, skin prick test, and serum omega-5 gliadin-specific IgE test). 39

Non-celiac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) is a recently proposed, increasingly recognized clinical condition in patients in whom celiac disease and wheat allergy have been ruled out. It is characterized by intestinal and extra-intestinal symptoms triggered by the ingestion of gluten-containing foods. 40 Due to the lack of a reliable biomarker, confirmation of an NCGS diagnosis relies only on a double-blind placebo-controlled (DBPC) gluten challenge. 41

So far, a gluten-free diet is the only safe and effective treatment for the above conditions of gluten intolerance. 32

Gluten-free “lifestylers”

Demand for gluten-free foods is not limited to the gluten-intolerant population. Although it is not clear whether a gluten-free diet is beneficial for one’s health, some gluten-tolerant consumers believe that gluten-free food products are simply healthier. 42 , 43 This can be partly explained by a kind of “health halo” effect, making consumers believe that products with “free-from” label are healthier overall. 44 Besides, some popular books by bestseller authors, athletes, and celebrities have encouraged a gluten-free diet. An online questionnaire survey demonstrated that 41% of non-celiac athletes, including Olympic medalists, follow a gluten-free diet 50–100% of the time, and that adoption of the diet in most cases was not based on a medical rationale and may have been driven by the perception that gluten removal provides health benefits and an ergogenic edge. 45 Approximately 13% of young adults are reported to value gluten-free food; this population is more likely to engage in other healthy dietary behaviors, such as eating breakfast daily and eating more fruits/vegetables while simultaneously pursuing questionable behaviors, such as using diet pills to control weight. 42

A double-blind randomized study found that the supposed health benefit of a gluten-free diet has no evidence base in individuals who do not have celiac disease or irritable bowel syndrome, demonstrating that gluten is unlikely to be the culprit for gastrointestinal symptoms or fatigue in otherwise healthy individuals. 43 Moreover, commercially available gluten-free food products tend to contain ingredients with less diversity and less nutritional quality compared with their gluten-containing counterparts. 46 , 47 Other studies claim that despite recent improvements in the formulation and availability of gluten-free foods, they still are less available and more expensive than gluten-containing versions. 48 They generally have adequate levels of fiber and sugar, but lower levels of protein and higher levels of fat compared with their gluten-containing counterparts. 48 Also, very few gluten-free foods are fortified with micronutrients. 48

The gluten-free products market was valued at USD 4.18 billion in 2017 and this is projected to reach USD 6.47 billion by 2023, at a compound average growth rate of 7.6% during the forecast period. 49 The gluten-free diet has become the mainstream rather than just supporting a niche market.

Developments of gluten-free breads

As mentioned in the previous sections, demand for the development of gluten-free foods is growing. 50 Much of the focus is on bread products, as bread is an important staple food. Rice is considered a suitable substitute for wheat, as it is available worldwide and is less allergenic. So, development of rice-based gluten-free breads is the main topic of this review. It is not easy to make bread without using wheat flour or gluten, as bread’s quality depends on the properties and functionality of gluten. 25 In a wheat flour dough, the gluten matrix, composed mainly of the protein network of gluten, starch granules, and water (Fig. 1a ), encloses the fermentation gas, making small “balloons”. Thus, the dough rises as the fermentation proceeds. On the other hand, hydration of flour from gluten-free cereals, such as rice, results in a runny “batter” rather than viscoelastic “dough” as their proteins do not possess the network-forming properties typically found in gluten. 51 Therefore, the fermentation gases rise to the surface while starch granules and yeast settle. 52 Generally, a gluten-free batter without a thickening agent, such as hydrocolloids, becomes foamy. 53 , 54

Several efforts have been made in the development of gluten-free breads. Typical gluten-free breads contain hydrocolloids (e.g., xanthan gum, guar gum, etc.) which increase the viscosity of the liquid phase, keeping the starch granules, yeast, and gas bubbles suspended in the fermentation process. 52 , 55 The subsequent baking process gelatinizes the starch and hardens around the hydrocolloid membrane surrounding the air bubbles to set the crumb structure. As a surface-active hydrocolloid, hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC) behaves somewhat differently. It has hydrophobic methyl ester/hydroxypropyl groups in addition to hydrophilic cellulose regions. Thus, HPMC stays at the gas/liquid interface, uniquely stabilizing the bubbles and preventing coalescence. 52 , 56 Moreover, as HPMC is thermoreversible, 57 it also helps harden the bubble membrane in the baking process. 58

Another recent approach includes enzymatic treatment of gluten-free batter. 51 Transglutaminase (EC 2.3.2.13) catalyzes the acyl-transfer reaction between primary amino groups on protein-bound lysine residues and γ-carboxyamide groups on protein-bound glutamine residues. 59 Thus, transglutaminase is capable of introducing covalent cross-links between proteins. 60 The protein cross-linking ability has been shown to transform weak gluten into a strong gluten, with measurable effects on rheological behavior. 61 The addition of transglutaminase, along with HPMC, to a gluten-free rice batter resulted in its improved elastic and viscous behavior, as well as a higher specific volume and softer crumbs in the resulting bread. 62 The improvement in the viscoelastic properties of the rice batter appeared to be associated with the enhanced capability of the rice flour to retain the carbon dioxide produced during proofing. The quantitative decrease of free amino groups of proteins suggested that this improvement was due to the cross-linking of protein, that is, the generation of a gluten substitute, supplementing the role of HPMC in the baking of rice bread. 62 Microstructure analyses of a rice-based bread fortified with skim milk or egg powder using confocal laser-scanning microscopy (CLSM) verified that addition of transglutaminase promoted the formation of a protein network in the gluten-free bread that mimicked the gluten network in wheat breads. 63 The networking efficiency of transglutaminase depends on both the correct protein substrates and the level of enzyme addition. Thus, formation of the appropriate protein network under the right conditions should improve the overall quality of gluten-free bread by enhancing loaf volume and crumb characteristics, as well as appearance.

Improvement of the gas-retaining capability of gluten-free batter using protease, a seemingly paradoxical strategy for cross-linking, is also in progress. Protease has actually been used to weaken wheat dough by cleaving a portion of the gluten network. 64 However, treatment of a brown rice batter with bacterial protease improved bread quality by significantly increasing the specific volume while decreasing crumb hardness and chewiness. 65 CLSM images of the bread crumbs suggested that the gelatinized starch phase was the main structure component in the protease-treated bread. Thus, protease may partially degrade the large macromolecular protein complex embedding starch granules, 66 , 67 resulting in improved continuity of the starch phase as well as better rheological properties of the batter. Treatment of rice batter with a protease from Aspergillus oryzae increased its viscosity and resulted in bread with a high specific volume. Optical microscopic observation of the batter suggested that partially degraded protein, possibly glutelin, and starch granules formed aggregations containing voids. 54 This fine network of interlinked protein‒starch aggregates resulted in gas cell stabilization. 54 Proteases are mainly categorized into four classes based on the catalytic mechanism: metallo, serine, cysteine, and aspartyl proteases. 68 Comparative analyses of the proteases 69 , 70 demonstrated that metallo, serine, and cysteine proteases, but not aspartyl protease, are effective additives for improving the quality of gluten-free rice breads.

Application of the redox regulation

Addition of glutathione, a ubiquitous natural peptide, facilitated the deformation of rice batter, thus increasing its elasticity in the early stages of bread baking and increasing the volume of the resulting bread. 53 , 71 Below, we would like to introduce briefly how glutathione can be used in making gluten-free rice bread. The disulfide bond is a cross-link between two cysteine residues and plays an important role in the structure/function of proteins. 72 Redox regulation, control of reduction/oxidation of the disulfide bonds, as well as phosphorylation are the two major post-translational modifications of proteins. 73 Thioredoxin (Trx), 74 a small 12 -kDa protein, and glutathione, 75 a natural tripeptide, play central roles in the redox-dependent regulatory mechanisms.

Trx reduces the disulfide bond of its target protein specifically. In the reactions below, oxidative status is abbreviated as “OX” and reduced status is abbreviated as “RED”:

Glutathione (GSH) is a tripeptide with a free SH group. Two molecules of glutathione occasionally cross-link with an intermolecular disulfide bond to make “oxidized” glutathione (GSSG). Glutathione’s reaction occasionally entails glutathionylation (GL): 76

Redox regulation has been a key target of Dr. Bob Buchanan’s laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, after he clarified the Trx-dependent regulatory mechanism in photosynthesis. 77 , 78 In the proteomic analyses of plant biochemistry mostly performed by the Berkeley group, 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 we have found that redox regulation occurs in many aspects of plant life and plays critical roles in plant biology: seed germination/maturation, photosynthesis, defense against oxidative stress/pathogens, and others. 83 Then, thinking in the opposite direction, modification of the disulfide bonds in biology, that is, artificial activation of the redox regulatory mechanism, might lead to the production of a new, useful plant. Following this hypothesis, overexpression of Trx in plants was first tried in the starchy endosperm of barley. 84 The transformant germinated earlier than the wild type. Also, enzymes in charge of starch mobilization appeared earlier. As fast germination of barley seeds reduces the production cost and improves the quality of beer, 85 the results suggest the practical utility of Trx transformants. Conversely, underexpression of Trx in white wheat seed has been tried. White wheat has received increasing attention, as it is naturally white and needs no bleaching for uses, such as breadmaking. However, white wheat grains tend to germinate on the spike before harvest. 86 The preharvest sprouting (PHS) reduces the crop yield as well as the quality of the seeds and the flour. Rainfall or high humidity in the grain-filling season leads to PHS, and causes farmers significant financial losses. 87 Suppression of Trx in the starchy endosperm led to improved PHS resistance in the transformants 88 without affecting the crop yield or flour quality. 89

These two findings reported by the Berkeley group are the first discovery that control of Trx expression, that is, artificial redox regulation, affects the physiological processes of plants. Although risk assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is a critical issue, 90 the characteristics of these and other trial model plants provide the possibility of the industrial application of redox regulation. 91

More recently, we have sought to use this strategy to enable rice batter to confine fermentation gas. Glutathione was added to rice batter in an attempt to transform the intramolecular disulfide bonds of rice proteins into intermolecular disulfide bonds and eventually form a gluten-like network. Both reduced glutathione (GSH) and oxidized glutathione (GSSG) were found to be successful in swelling gluten-free rice batter and bread. 53 , 71 However, contrary to our expectations, analysis of the proteins revealed that no gluten-like protein network was formed. In contrast, microstructure and biochemical analyses suggested that glutathione cleaved the disulfide-linked glutelin polymers embedding the starch granules. The glutelin polymer has been suggested to work as a hindrance to the absorption of water by starch molecules when water is added to a rice flour; 66 glutathione may fray this barrier to make the batter more consistent and viscous, thereby improving its gas-holding capability in the fermentation process, 53 as is the case with protease-treated rice batter. 65 Although the number of its applications in food processing has been limited so far, 91 glutathione appears to be a promising tool for developing food with new properties. Glutathione is usable as a food ingredient in the United States 92 and some east Asian countries. For example, glutathione-based oral dietary supplements have been accorded the status of a Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) constituent with Section 201(s) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of the US Food and Drug Administration (US-FDA). 93

On the other hand, usage of glutathione for food has some limitations. First, glutathione is not usable as a food in all countries. In Japan, for instance, it is recognized as medicine, and cannot be incorporated as a food additive. 94 Second, GSH-added rice batter has been shown to yield a slight amount of hydrogen sulfide (0.43 ppm) and methyl mercaptan (0.106 ppm) in the headspace gas of the bread. 71 Generation of hydrogen sulfide in heated meat or purified GSH is well known; 95 indeed, a slight amount of hydrogen sulfide contributes to the pleasant aroma of cooked meat 96 and rice. 97 Usage of GSSG in breadmaking instead of GSH significantly reduced the generation of these sulfur compounds, 71 and sensory evaluation demonstrated that the aroma of GSSG-added rice bread was almost equivalent to that of non-added bread. 98 However, we sought to develop rice bread without glutathione or any other additives.

In the process of developing glutathione-added rice bread, we found that the control sample, that is, “non-added bread”, occasionally swelled in fermentation. Although it collapsed mostly in the following baking process, we expected that if optimal conditions could be found, we could make an additive-free, gluten-free rice bread from solely the basic ingredients: rice flour, water, yeast, sugar, salt, and oil.

Additive-free, gluten-free rice bread

The development of additive-free, gluten-free rice bread has taken a trial-and-error rather than a strategic approach. 99 , 100 First, we tried several commercially available rice flours and found that flours with low-starch damage (<5%) were the most suitable. The physical property of the gluten-free rice batter appeared quite different from the familiar viscoelastic wheat dough. It had an appearance and texture of a slurry with low viscosity. So, lots of “cooking tips” have been discerned for the breadmaking process. For example, as rice batter tends to make lumps, we paid attention in the mixing procedure to avoid lumps. Also, the dried yeast needs to be dissolved completely. Generation of bubbles of different sizes due to heterogeneous distribution of dried yeast may result in their coalescence 101 and a sudden shrinkage of the batter in the fermentation process. The breadmaking processes, i.e., mixing of the batter, fermentation and baking, as well as tips for successful making in the respective processes, are mentioned in a later section.

To clarify how the gluten-free batter swells without additives, we sought to investigate the microstructure of the fermenting batter. The fermenting batter appeared like a meringue and was quite different from wheat dough, which is so viscoelastic that its full mass can be lifted with a scoop (Fig. 1b ). As it was not easy to freeze the fragile batter without destroying the delicate structure, a sectioned specimen for microscope observation could not be made. Instead, freshly made batter was sandwiched between a microscope slide and a coverslip and the batter was left at room temperature to ferment there. Optical microscopic observation revealed the microstructure: bubbles covered by starch granules (Fig. 2 ). The structure was entirely different from that of the typical wheat dough, in which gas cells are surrounded by the gluten matrix made by a network of gluten protein and starch granules. 102 In contrast, it had a similar structure to a “particle emulsion” 101 in which rice granules stabilize the interface between oil and water (Fig. 2 ). 103 Thus, it was suggested that the bubble observed in an additive-free, gluten-free rice batter had the structure of a “particle foam” (Figs. 1a , 2 ). 101

Explanatory figure of particle emulsion/foam. Adapted from refs. 99 , 100 . Scale bar: 30 µm. Copyright (2017), with permission from Elsevier

The hypothetical mechanism is illustrated in Fig. 2 . Generally, oil and water do not mix. However, when they are mixed well in the presence of a detergent, microscopic oil droplets covered by detergent molecules disperse throughout water. This is a classic emulsion. Likewise, aeration of water in the presence of detergent results in a foam. A small amount of air is surrounded by a thin film of water, in which detergent molecules stabilize the boundary.

At the beginning of the 20th century, solid particles were found able to adsorb onto the interface between oil and water, and play a similar role to that of detergent molecules. 104 , 105 This is called a “particle-stabilized emulsion” or “particle emulsion”. Starch granules of native rice, maize, wheat, 103 quinoa, 106 high-pressure treated corn starch granules, 107 chemically modified waxy maize and tapioca, 108 as well as rice starch granules 109 have been reported to form particle emulsions. A particle-stabilized foam occurs in the same manner. Particle emulsions/foams have received renewed attention during the past decade, as recent advancement in nanoparticle technology accelerates research trends. 110 , 111 Moreover, such foams have potential applications in a wide variety of industries, including foods, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetics. One of the key advantages of the mechanism for foodstuff applications is that microparticles of biological origin, such as starch granules, cellulose, or protein particles, work as stabilizers. 101 Our report showed for the first time that rice starch granules stabilize particle “foam” in an additive-free, gluten-free rice batter. 99

The breadmaking processes and tips for the successful gluten-free breadmaking from rice flour are summarized in Fig. 3 . In the early stage of fermentation, yeast produces fermentation gas, composed mainly of carbon dioxide and alcohol. Ordinarily, the batter cannot hold the gas and becomes foamy. 53 , 54 However, if rice flour with low-starch damage is used and breadmaking is performed with the right conditions, the fermentation gas is trapped in the batter. 99 Thus, small bubbles appear throughout the batter. The small bubbles are particle foams in which fermentation gas is surrounded by starch granules. As the fermentation proceeds, the fragile bubbles gradually grow bigger, making the whole batter rise. Here, it is critical to keep the temperature stable, as fragile bubbles tend to burst in fluctuating temperatures. In the late stage of fermentation, the swollen bubbles should be heated rapidly to make the starch granules gelatinize, that is, to solidify the bubble walls. The most swollen bubbles are the most fragile, so rapid heating is the key.

Summary of the procedures for making additive-free rice bread and “cooking tips” for each step. Adapted from ref., 100 with permission

The overall process resembles the synthesis of a polyacrylamide hydrogel, in which modified nanoparticles stabilize an air/water (acrylamide solution) emulsion, and the macroporous structure is fixed by thermal-induced polymerization. 112

We have investigated several commercially available rice flours and found that rice flours with less starch damage (<5%) make bread with a higher specific volume. 99 Higher starch damage tends to facilitate greater absorption of water by starch granules. 113 The hydrophobicity/hydrophilicity ratio determines the aptitude of starch granules to form particle foam. 114 Thus, to prevent destabilization of the fragile bubbles in the fermentation process, it is important to maintain the proper hydrophobicity/ hydrophilicity ratio. Our success in making bread using flour with less starch damage, that is, less water absorption, seems consistent with the hypothetical mechanism. In this context, reduction of surface tension by hydrophobic treatment of rice starch granules was successful in making a stable particle emulsion. 108 , 109

From another point of view, if rice starch granules are capable of constituting a particle foam, they should have the ability to mimic the function of detergents, that is, to reduce the surface tension of water. Starch granules with less starch damage (4.7 w/w%) effectively reduced the surface tension of water from 73 to 35 mN/m. In contrast, starch granules with higher starch damage (9.8 w/w%) were not as effective, reducing the surface tension to only 47 mN/m. 99

Starch granules show emulsion-forming ability by stabilizing the water/tetradecane interface. 108 So, similar experiments were conducted using starch granules with low- and high-starch damage (Fig. 4 ). Both starch granules made stable water/tetradecane emulsions (Fig. 4a ). However, the microstructures of the emulsions were somewhat different (Fig. 4b ). Optical microscopic analyses of the emulsions showed that starch granules with less starch damage (LD) covered the oil droplets densely. In contrast, in the case of rice granules with higher starch damage (HD), swollen granules were occasionally seen, and the oil droplets were not covered completely. Thus, rice granules with low-starch damage demonstrated better particle-emulsion-forming ability compared with the high-starch-damage counterparts. This was consistent with the observation that rice starch granules with low-starch damage were suitable for constructing particle foam, that is, to make additive-free rice bread.

a Water/tetradecane emulsions formed by starch granules at different rice flour concentrations. From left to right: control (no flour), addition of rice flour with low-starch damage (20% w/w, 50% w/w), as well as high-starch damage (20% w/w, 50% w/w). b Optical microscopic analyses of the emulsion. Rice flour with low- (LD) and high- (HD) starch damage was compared. Adapted from ref. 99 Scale bar: 100 µm for ×100, and 30 µm for ×400, respectively. Copyright (2017), with permission from Elsevier

All these three observations support the hypothetical particle foam theory. Verification studies are in progress in our lab.

Several approaches in the development of gluten-free bread by our own laboratory and others have been introduced in this review, together with the social and scientific context of these efforts. The research is aimed to improve the quality of life of celiac disease or wheat allergy patients. Better bread quality (flavor, texture, and volume), reduced production cost, and wider availability are all important issues. 115 For example, so far, rice bread lacks the mouth-watering aroma of freshly baked wheat bread. It is not clear whether this is inevitable or whether a better selection of ingredients or an improved breadmaking procedure could lead to improvement of the aroma and flavor of rice bread, such that it becomes comparable with that of wheat bread. Besides, rice breads tend to be sticky compared with wheat bread. Also, gelatinized rice starch tends to retrograde faster, 116 so the bread is prone to become stale and hardened faster, 117 resulting in a shorter shelf life. 118 Using rice varieties with intermediate amylose content and a low water absorption index may give superior crumb properties. 119

Recent wide availability of household breadmaking countertop appliances has prompted our laboratory and others to develop gluten-free bread recipes suitable for these machines. Providing specific ingredients, such as fitted rice flour sold along with the breadmaker, may help consumers experience success in making custom gluten-free bread at home. Improving the machines by incorporating an induction-heating (IH) system may be suitable for making “particle-foam” type rice bread, as an IH system guarantees stable temperature control in fermentation as well as rapid heating in the baking process. 120 Addition of micronutrients and functional food ingredients is also an important theme. Further studies may thus improve the bread quality to be comparable to that of wheat bread and to improve the quality of wheat-sensitive patients’ life through providing a satisfactory diet.

Arzani, A. in Flour and breads and their fortification in health and disease prevention 1st edn, (eds. Preedy, V. R., Watson, R. R. & Patel, V. B.) Ch. 7 (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2011).

Chazan, M. & Lehner, M. An ancient analogy: pot baked bread in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. Paléorient 16 , 21–35 (1990).

Article Google Scholar

Hansson, A. M. Grain-paste, porridge and bread—ancient cereal-based food. Labor. Arkeol. 7 , 5–20 (1994).

Legras, J. L., Merdinoglu, D., Cornuet, J. M. & Karst, F. Bread, beer and wine: Saccharomyces cerevisiae diversity reflects human history. Mol. Ecol. 16 , 2091–2102 (2007).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Miller, N. & Wetterstrom, W. in The Cambridge World History of Food 1st edn, Vol. 2 (eds. Kiple, K. & Ornelas, K.). Ch. VA (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2000).

Samuel, D. Bread making and social interactions at the Amarna workmen’s village, Egypt. World Archaeol. 31 , 121–144 (1999).

Samuel, D. Investigation of ancient Egyptian baking and brewing methods by correlative microscopy. Science 273 , 488–490 (1996).

Arranz-Otaegui, A., Carretero, L. G., Ramsey, M. N., Fuller, D. Q. & Richter, T. Archaeobotanical evidence reveals the origins of bread 14,400 years ago in northeastern Jordan. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115 , 7925–7930 (2018).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Dobraszczyk, B. J. & Morgenstern, M. P. Review: rheology and the breadmaking process. J. Cereal Sci. 38 , 229–245 (2003).

Biesiekierski, J. R. What is gluten? J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 32 , 78–81 (2017).

Wieser, H. Chemistry of gluten proteins. Food Microbiol. 24 , 115–119 (2007).

Gan, Z. et al. The microstructure and gas retention of bread dough. J. Cereal Sci. 12 , 15–24 (1990).

Wang, F. C. & Sun, X. S. Thermal expansion of flour-water dough measured with a dynamic mechanical analyzer. Cereal Chem. 76 , 87–91 (1999).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Kusunose, C., Fujii, T. & Matsumoto, H. Role of starch granules in controlling expansion of dough during baking. Cereal Chem. 76 , 920–924 (1999).

Helou, C., Jacolot, P., Niquet-Léridon, C., Gadonna-Widehem, P. & Tessier, F. J. Maillard reaction products in bread: a novel semi-quantitative method for evaluating melanoidins in bread. Food Chem. 190 , 904–911 (2016).

Pico, J., Bernal, J. & Gómez, M. Wheat bread aroma compounds in crumb and crust: a review. Food Res. Int. 75 , 200–215 (2015).

Brouns, F., Hemery, Y., Price, R. & Anson, N. Wheat aleurone: separation, composition, health aspects, and potential food use. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 52 , 553–568 (2012).

Rojas, J. A., Rosell, C. M., Benedito de Barber, C., Pérez-Munuera, I. & Lluch, M. A.The baking process of wheat rolls followed by cryo scanning electron microscopy. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 212 , 57–63 (2000).

Prabhasankar, P. & Rao, P. H. Effect of different milling methods on chemical composition of whole wheat flour. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 213 , 465–469 (2001).

Maskus, H., Bourré, L., Fraser, S., Sarkar, A. & Malcolmson, L. Effects of grinding method on the compositional, physical, and functional properties of whole and split yellow pea flours. Cereal Foods World 61 , 59–64 (2016).

Ferrand, E. A. Flour properties in relation to the modern bread processes in the United Kingdom with special reference to alpha-amylase and starch damage. Cereal Chem. 41 , 98–111 (1964).

Google Scholar

Goesaert, H. et al. Wheat flour constituents: how they impact bread quality, and how to impact their functionality. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 16 , 12–30 (2005).

Miralbés, C. Quality control in the milling industry using near infrared transmittance spectroscopy. Food Chem. 88 , 621–628 (2004).

Balakireva, A. V. & Zamyatnin, A. A. Properties of gluten intolerance: gluten structure, evolution, pathogenicity and detoxification capabilities. Nutrients 8 , 644 (2016).

Article PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar

El Khoury, D., Balfour-Ducharme, S. & Joye, I. J. A review on the gluten-free diet: technological and nutritional challenges. Nutrients 10 , 1410 (2018).

Singh, P. et al. Global prevalence of celiac disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 16 , 823–836 (2018).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Shan, L. et al. Identification and analysis of multivalent proteolytically resistant peptides from gluten: implications for celiac sprue. J. Proteome Res. 4 , 1732–1741 (2005).

Di Sabatino, A. et al. The function of tissue transglutaminase in celiac disease. Autoimmun. Rev. 11 , 746–753 (2012).

Article PubMed CAS Google Scholar

Tollefsen, S. et al. HLA-DQ2 and -DQ8 signatures of gluten T cell epitopes in celiac disease. J. Clin. Invest. 116 , 2226–2236 (2006).

Molberg, O. et al. Tissue transglutaminase selectively modifies gliadin peptides that are recognized by gut-derived T cells in celiac disease. Nat. Med. 4 , 713–717 (1998).

Dieterich, W. et al. Identification of tissue transglutaminase as the autoantigen of celiac disease. Nat. Med. 3 , 797–801 (1997).

Cianferoni, A. Wheat allergy: diagnosis and managemen t . J. Asthma Allergy 9 , 13–25 (2016).

Matsuo, H. et al. Exercise and aspirin increase levels of circulating gliadin peptides in patients with wheat-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis. Clin. Exp. Allergy 35 , 461–466 (2005).

Salcedo, G., Quirce, S. & Diaz-Perales, A. Wheat allergens associated with Baker’s asthma. J. Investig. Allergol. Clin. Immunol. 21 , 81–92 (2011).

CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Nowak-Węgrzyn, A., Katz, Y., Mehr, S. S. & Koletzko, S. Non-IgE-mediated gastrointestinal food allergy. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 135 , 1114–1124 (2015).

Venkataraman, D. et al. Prevalence and longitudinal trends of food allergy during childhood and adolescence: results of the Isle of Wight Birth Cohort study. Clin. Exp. Allergy 48 , 394–402 (2018).

Young, E., Stoneham, M. D., Petruckevitch, A., Barton, J. & Rona, R. A population study of food intolerance. Lancet 343 , 1127–1130 (1994).

Biagini, R. E. et al. Evaluation of the prevalence of antiwheat-, anti-flour dust, and anti-alpha-amylase specific IgE antibodies in US blood donors. Ann. Allergy Asthma Immunol. 92 , 649–653 (2004).

Morita, E. et al. Prevalence of wheat allergy in Japanese adults. Allergol. Int. 61 , 101–105 (2012).

Barbaro, M. R., Cremon, C., Stanghellini, V. & Barbara, G. Recent advances in understanding non-celiac gluten sensitivity. F1000Res. 7 , F1000 Faculty Rev-1631 (2018).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Casella, G. et al. Non celiac gluten sensitivity and diagnostic challenges. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. Bed Bench. 11 , 197–202 (2018).

PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Christoph, M. J., Larson, N., Hootman, K. C., Miller, J. M. & Neumark-Sztainer, D. Who values gluten-free? Dietary intake, behaviors, and sociodemographic characteristics of young adults who value gluten-free food. J. Acad. Nutr. Diet. 118 , 1389–1398 (2018).

Rej, A., Kurien, M., Tosi, P., Trott, N. & Sanders, D. PWE-145 The role of a gluten free diet in ‘lifestylers’? the first double blind randomised study. Gut 67 , abstr. A220 (2018).

Priven, M., Baum, J., Vieira, E., Fung, T. & Herbold, N. The influence of a factitious free-from food product label on consumer perceptions of healthfulness. J. Acad. Nutr. Diet. 115 , 1808–1814 (2015).

Lis, D. M., Stellingwerff, T., Shing, C. M., Ahuja, K. D. & Fell, J. W. Exploring the popularity, experiences, and beliefs surrounding gluten-free diets in nonceliac athletes. Int. J. Sport Nutr. Exerc. Metab. 25 , 37–45 (2015).

do Nascimento, A. B., Fiates, G. M., Dos Anjos, A. & Teixeira, E. Analysis of ingredient lists of commercially available gluten-free and gluten-containing food products using the text mining technique. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 64 , 217–222 (2013).

Quan, C. V. F., Ferreiro, S. E. R. & Cantón, O. S. Gluten-free diet: always as easy, useful, and healthy as people think? J. Child Sci. 8 , e75–e81 (2018).

Allen, B. & Orfila, C. The availability and nutritional adequacy of gluten-free bread and pasta. Nutrients 10 , 1370 (2018).

Markets & Markets Web site, 2018. Gluten-free products market by type (bakery products, snacks & RTE products, pizzas & pastas, condiments & dressings), distribution channel (conventional stores, specialty stores, drugstores & pharmacies), and region—global forecast to 2023. https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/gluten-free-products-market-738.html .

Gobbetti, M. et al. How to improve the gluten-free diet: the state of the art from a food science perspective. Food Res. Int. 110 , 22–32 (2018).

Renzetti, S. & Rosell, C. M. Role of enzymes in improving the functionality of proteins in non-wheat dough systems. J. Cereal Sci. 67 , 35–45 (2016).

Schober, T. J. in Gluten-free food science and technology . 1st edn, (ed. Gallagher, E.) Ch. 9 (Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, 2009).

Yano, H. Improvements in the bread-making quality of gluten-free rice batter by glutathione. J. Agr. Food Chem. 58 , 7949–7954 (2010).

Hamada, S., Suzuki, K., Aoki, N. & Suzuki, Y. Improvements in the qualities of gluten-free bread after using a protease obtained from Aspergillus oryzae . J. Cereal Sci. 57 , 91–97 (2013).

Dickinson, E. Hydrocolloids acting as emulsifying agents—How do they do it? Food Hydrocoll. 78 , 2–14 (2018).

Nishita, K. D., Roberts, R. L. & Bean, M. M. Development of a yeast-leavened rice-based formula. Cereal Chem. 53 , 626–635 (1976).

CAS Google Scholar

Kato, T., Yokoyama, M. & Takahashi, A. Melting temperatures of thermally reversible gels IV. Methyl cellulose-water gels. Colloid Polym. Sci. 256 , 15–21 (1978).

Haque, A. & Morris, E. R. Combined use of ispaghula and HPMC to replace or augment gluten in breadmaking. Food Res. Int. 27 , 379–393 (1994).

Motoki, M. & Seguro, K. Transglutaminase and its use for food processing. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 9 , 204–210 (1998).

Aboumahmoud, R. & Savello, P. Crosslinking of whey protein by transglutaminase. J. Dairy Sci. 73 , 256–263 (1990).

Larre, C. et al. Biochemical analysis and rheological properties of gluten modified by transglutaminase. Cereal Chem. 77 , 121–127 (2000).

Gujral, H. S. & Rosell, C. M. Functionality of rice flour modified with a microbial transglutaminase. J. Cereal Sci. 39 , 225–230 (2004).

Moore, M. M., Heinbockel, M., Dockery, P., Ulmer, H. M. & Arendt, E. K. Network formation in gluten-free bread with application of transglutaminase. Cereal Chem. 83 , 28–36 (2006).

Redman, D. G. Softening of gluten by wheat proteases. J. Sci. Food Agr. 22 , 75–78 (1971).

Renzetti, S. & Arendt, E. K. Effect of protease treatment on the baking quality of brown rice bread: from textural and rheological properties to biochemistry and microstructure. J. Cereal Sci. 50 , 22–28 (2009).

Hamaker, B. R. & Griffin, V. K. Effect of disulfide bond-containing protein on rice starch gelatinization and pasting. Cereal Chem. 70 , 377–380 (1993).

Derycke, V. et al. Impact of proteins on pasting and cooking properties of nonparboiled and parboiled rice. Cereal Chem. 82 , 468–474 (2005).

Sumantha, A., Larroche, C. & Pandey, A. Microbiology and industrial biotechnology of food-grade proteases: a perspective. Food Technol. Biotechnol. 44 , 211–220 (2006).

Kawamura-Konishi, Y., Shoda, K., Koga, H. & Honda, Y. Improvement in glutenfree rice bread quality by protease treatment. J. Cereal Sci. 58 , 45–50 (2013).

Hatta, E., Matsumoto, K. & Honda, Y. Bacillolysin, papain, and subtilisin improve the quality of gluten-free rice bread. J. Cereal Sci. 61 , 41–47 (2015).

Yano, H. Comparison of oxidized and reduced glutathione in the bread-making qualities of rice batter. J. Food Sci. 77 , C182–C188 (2012).

Bak, D. W., Bechtel, T. J., Falco, J. A. & Weerapana, E. Cysteine reactivity across the subcellular universe. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 48 , 96–105 (2019).

McConnell, E. W., Werth, E. G. & Hicks, L. M. The phosphorylated redox proteome of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii: revealing novel means for regulation of protein structure and function. Redox Biol. 17 , 35–46 (2018).

Buchanan, B. B. The path to thioredoxin and redox regulation in chloroplasts. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 67 , 1–24 (2016).

Bachhawat, A. K. & Yadav, S. The glutathione cycle: glutathione metabolism beyond the γ-glutamyl cycle. IUBMB Life 70 , 585–592 (2018).

Zhang, J., Ye, Z. W., Singh, S., Townsend, D. M. & Tew, K. D. An evolving understanding of the S-glutathionylation cycle in pathways of redox regulation. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 120 , 204–216 (2018).

Buchanan, B. B. & Wolosiuk, R. A. Photosynthetic regulatory protein found in animal and bacterial cells. Nature 264 , 669–670 (1976).

Wolosiuk, R. A. & Buchanan, B. B. Thioredoxin and glutathione regulate photosynthesis in chloroplasts. Nature 266 , 565–567 (1977).

Yano, H., Wong, J. H., Lee, Y. M., Cho, M. J. & Buchanan, B. B. A strategy for the identification of proteins targeted by thioredoxin. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 98 , 4794–4799 (2001).

Yano, H., Wong, J. H., Cho, M. J. & Buchanan, B. B. Redox changes accompanying the degradation of seed storage proteins in germinating rice. Plant Cell Physiol. 42 , 879–883 (2001).

Yano, H. & Kuroda, M. Disulfide proteome yields a detailed understanding of redox regulations: a model study of thioredoxin-linked reactions in seed germination. Proteomics 6 , 294–300 (2006).

Motohashi, K., Kondoh, A., Stumpp, M. T. & Hisabori, T. Comprehensive survey of proteins targeted by chloroplast thioredoxin. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 98 , 11224–11229 (2001).

Montrichard, F. et al. Thioredoxin targets in plants: the first 30 years. J. Proteom. 72 , 452–474 (2009).

Cho, M. J. et al. Overexpression of thioredoxin h leads to enhanced activity of starch debranching enzyme (pullulanase) in barley grain. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 96 , 14641–14646 (1999).

Bamforth, C. W. Brewing and brewing research: past, present and future. J. Sci. Food Agric. 80 , 1371–1378 (2000).

Wu, J. M. & Carver, B. F. Sprout damage and preharvest sprout resistance in hard white winter wheat. Crop Sci. 39 , 441–447 (1999).

Nonogaki, H., Barrero, J. M. & Li, C. Seed Dormancy, germination and pre-harvest sprouting. Front. Plant Sci. 9 , 1783–1785 (2018).

Li, Y. C. et al. The level of expression of thioredoxin is linked to fundamental properties and applications of wheat seeds. Mol. Plant 2 , 430–441 (2009).

Ren, J. P. et al. Modifying thioredoxin expression in cereals leads to improved pre-harvest sprouting resistance and changes in other grain properties. Seed Sci. Res. 22 , S30–S35 (2012).

Fernandez, A. & Paoletti, C. Unintended effects in genetically modified food/feed safety: a way forward. Trends Biotechnol. 36 , 872–875 (2018).

Yano, H. Ongoing applicative studies of plant thioredoxins. Mol. Plant 7 , 4–13 (2014).

Richie, J. P. Jr. et al. Randomized controlled trial of oral glutathione supplementation on body stores of glutathione. Eur. J. Nutr. 54 , 251–263 (2015).

Allen, J. & Bradley, R. D. Effects of oral glutathione supplementation on systemic oxidative stress biomarkers in human volunteers. J. Altern. Complement Med. 17 , 827–833 (2011).

Weschawalit, S., Thongthip, S., Phutrakool, P. & Asawanonda, P. Glutathione and its antiaging and antimelanogenic effects. Clin. Cosmet. Investig. Dermatol. 10 , 147–153 (2017).

Mecchi, E. P., Pippen, E. L. & Lineweaver, H. Origin of hydrogen sulfide in heated chicken muscle. J. Food Sci. 29 , 393–399 (1964).

Pippen, E. L. & Mecchi, E. P. Hydrogen sulfide, a direct and potentially indirect contributor to cooked chicken aroma. J. Food Sci. 34 , 443–446 (1969).

Champagne, E. T. Rice aroma and flavor: a literature review. Cereal Chem. 85 , 445–454 (2008).

Yano, H., Kaji, N. & Tokuriki, M. Further studies on the protein chemistry and property of glutathione-added rice bread: Evidence of glutathionylation of batter protein as well as crumb structure/sensory evaluation. Jpn. Agr. Res. Q. 47 , 417–421 (2013).

Yano, H. et al. Development of gluten-free rice bread: pickering stabilization as a possible batter-swelling mechanism. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 79 , 632–639 (2017a).

Yano, H. NARO Annual Report (in Japanese), NARO, Tsukuba. http://www.naro.affrc.go.jp/project/results/popular/result060/2017/17_054.html (2017b).

Dickinson, E. Biopolymer-based particles as stabilizing agents for emulsions and foams. Food Hydrocoll. 68 , 219–231 (2017).

Ortolan, F. & Steel, C. J. Protein characteristics that affect the quality of vital wheat gluten to be used in baking: a review. Comp. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 16 , 369–381 (2017).

Li, C., Li, Y., Sun, P. & Yang, C. Pickering emulsions stabilized by native starch granules. Colloid Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 431 , 142–149 (2013).

Ramsden, W. Separation of solids in the surface-layers of solutions and ‘suspensions’ (Observations on surface-membranes, bubbles, emulsions, and mechanical coagulation).-preliminary account. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 72 , 156–164 (1903).

Pickering, S. U. Emulsions. J. Chem. Soc. 91 , 2001–2021 (1907).

Rayner, M., Timgren, A., Sjöö, M. & Dejmek, P. Quinoa starch granules: a candidate for stabilising food-grade Pickering emulsions. J. Sci. Food Agr. 92 , 1841–1847 (2012).

Villamonte, G., Jury, V. & de Lamballerie, M. Stabilizing emulsions using high-pressure-treated corn starch. Food Hydrocoll. 52 , 581–589 (2016).

Yusoff, A. & Murray, B. S. Modified starch granules as particle-stabilizers of oil-in-water emulsions. Food Hydrocoll. 25 , 42–55 (2011).

Jain, S., Winuprasith, T. & Suphantharika, M. Design and synthesis of modified and resistant starch-based oil-in-water emulsions. Food Hydrocoll. 89 , 153–162 (2019).

Stocco, A., Drenckhan, W., Rio, E., Langevin, D. & Binks, B. P. Particle-stabilised foams: an interfacial study. Soft Matter 5 , 2215–2222 (2009).

Aveyard, R., Binks, B. P. & Clint, J. H. Emulsions stabilised solely by colloidal particles. Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 100 , 503–546 (2003).

Tan, H., Tu, S., Zhao, Y., Wang, H. & Du, Q. A simple and environment-friendly approach for synthesizing macroporous polymers from aqueous foams. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 509 , 209–218 (2018).

Hatcher, D. W., Anderson, M. J., Desjardins, R. G., Edwards, N. M. & Dexter, J. E. Effects of flour particle size and starch damage on processing and quality of white salted noodles. Cereal Chem. 79 , 64–71 (2002).

Binks, B. P. & Clint, J. H. Solid wettability from surface energy components: relevance to Pickering emulsions. Langmuir 18 , 1270–1273 (2002).

Hager, A. S. et al. Investigation of product quality, sensory profile and ultrastructure of breads made from a range of commercial gluten-free flours compared to their wheat counterparts. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 235 , 333–344 (2012).

Lin, L. et al. Effects of molecular compositions on crystalline structure and functional properties of rice starches with different amylopectin extra-long chains. Food Hydrocoll. 88 , 137–145 (2019).

Sciarini, L. S., Ribotta, P. D., León, A. E. & Pérez, G. T. Influence of gluten-free flours and their mixtures on batter properties and bread quality. Food Bioprocess. Technol. 3 , 577–585 (2010).

Ai, J. et al. Anti-staling of high-moisture starchy food: effect of hydrocolloids, emulsifiers and enzymes on mechanics of steamed-rice cakes. Food Hydrocoll. 83 , 454–464 (2018).

Han, H. M., Cho, J. H., Kang, H. W. & Koh, B. K. Rice varieties in relation to rice bread quality. J. Sci. Food Agr. 92 , 1462–1467 (2012).

Lucia, O., Maussion, P., Dede, E. J. & Burdio, J. M. Induction heating technology and its applications: past developments, current technology, and future challenges. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 61 , 2509–2520 (2014).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We appreciate Dr. Bob Buchanan and Dr. Peggy Lemaux, University of California, and Dr. Wallace Yokoyama and Dr. James Pan, USDA, for useful discussions. Dr. Shigeru Kuroda is also appreciated for his encouragement throughout this work.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Food Research Institute, National Agriculture and Food Research Organization, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8642, Japan

Hiroyuki Yano

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hiroyuki Yano .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The author declares that the author has no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Yano, H. Recent practical researches in the development of gluten-free breads. npj Sci Food 3 , 7 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-019-0040-1

Download citation

Received : 26 December 2018

Accepted : 02 April 2019

Published : 01 May 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-019-0040-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Textural characteristics and color analyses of 3d printed gluten-free pizza dough and crust.

Chandan Maurya
Wenchao Zhou

Journal of Food Science and Technology (2023)

Semi‐volume gluten‐free bread: effect of guar gum, sodium caseinate and transglutaminase enzyme on the quality parameters

Mahdis Moradi
Marzieh Bolandi
Mohadeseh Eslami Kanafi

Journal of Food Measurement and Characterization (2021)

Fortification of traditional egg pasta (erişte) with edible insects: nutritional quality, cooking properties and sensory characteristics evaluation

Burcu Çabuk
Burak Yılmaz

Journal of Food Science and Technology (2020)

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
J Res Med Sci

Gluten-free products in celiac disease: Nutritional and technological challenges and solutions

Seyede marzieh hosseini.

Department of Food Science and Technology, National Nutrition and Food Technology Research Institute, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Nafiseh Soltanizadeh

1 Department of Food Science and Technology, College of Agriculture, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran

Parisa Mirmoghtadaee

2 Specialist in Community and Preventive Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Parisa Banavand

Leila mirmoghtadaie, saeedeh shojaee-aliabadi.

In celiac patient exposure to even only a small amount of gluten can lead to malabsorption of some important nutrients including calcium, iron, folic acid, and fat-soluble vitamins because of small-intestine inflammation. A strictly followed gluten-free (GF) diet throughout the patient's lifetime is the only effective treatment for celiac disease; however, elimination of gluten from cereal-based product leads to many technological and nutritional problems. This report discusses different substitutes to replace gluten functionality and examines the economic and social impacts of adherence to a GF diet. Better knowledge about the molecular basis of this disorder has encouraged the search for new methods of patient treatment. The new and common GF sources and different challenges encountered in production and consumption of these products and different solutions for improving their properties are discussed in this review.

INTRODUCTION

Celiac disease is a chronic inflammatory disorder of the intestine which being asymptomatic to causing severe malnutrition.[ 1 ] The prevalence of celiac disease is <0.5%–1% worldwide.[ 2 ] Gluten is the storage protein of wheat and includes glutenin and alcohol-soluble gliadin. Gliadin and other prolamins in rye (secalins) and barley (hordeins) are toxic for patients with celiac disease.[ 3 ] A gluten-free diet (GFD) is the mainstay of celiac disease treatment.[ 3 ] Adherence to a GFD improves many clinical and serological symptoms[ 4 ] and reduces the incidence of malignancies.[ 5 ] Furthermore, it can prevent the development of many autoimmune diseases such as hematologic disorders, hepatitis, and inflammatory bowel and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus diseases.[ 6 ] While a limited amount of gluten is permitted in a celiac patient's diet, the amount of tolerable gluten varies widely between 10 mg and 34–36 mg gluten per day.[ 7 ] This has led to confusion about labeling “GF” products. For example, in Canada, such products must meet standards of <20 ppm gluten (20 mg gluten/1 kg), whereas other countries specify a maximum of 200 ppm.[ 8 ] However, producing food that provides a daily gluten intake of <10 mg is acceptable.[ 7 ] Omitting or reducing gluten lowers the quality of end products; this could be overcome with gluten substitutes. This paper aims to review the current knowledge on different GF cereals and gluten substitutes used for the production of GF food and the recent advances in molecular knowledge of celiac disease which can help in the development of new methods for celiac therapy.

DIFFERENT SOURCE OF GLUTEN-FREE FLOUR

Hitherto, total lifelong avoidance of gluten ingestion has remained the primary treatment for celiac disease. The overall objective of the GFD is maintaining health through the adoption of a well-balanced diet without using gluten. Observing a strict GFD is not easy, not least because it contributes to the social isolation of patients with celiac disease. In addition, nutritional deficiencies in Vitamins D and B, iron, zinc, calcium, magnesium, and fiber may occur. Furthermore, developing good-quality GF products could be challenging due to the unique properties of gluten.[ 9 ]

Several significant properties of rice – it lacks gluten, has a bland taste, is colorless and hypoallergenic, has low levels of protein, sodium, fat, and fiber, and contains high amounts of easily digested carbohydrates – make it suitable for making flour that can be used to prepare GF products. As rice contains a relatively small amount of prolamin, it is necessary to combine it with some sort of gum, emulsifier, enzymes, modified starch, or dairy products to obtain viscoelastic properties.[ 10 ] The color of the crust and texture characteristics of acidic extruded rice-flour bread is been found to be similar to those of wheat bread, but it has a low specific volume.[ 11 ] Rice–noodle products are important foods in many Asian countries. Since rice protein cannot participate in the forming of a cohesive dough structure, gelatinized starch plays a role as a binder.[ 12 ] Rice can also be formed into flakes: rice is cooked, coated with skim milk as a nutritious ingredient, and then partially dried, tempered, passed through flaking rolls, and toasted in an oven. Crackers can be also obtained using either nonwaxy or waxy rice.[ 13 ] Technological characteristics of rice-flour products could be improved by the addition of a protein source such as spirulina.[ 1 , 14 ]

The high protein, fat, and fiber content of pure oats make them a suitable choice for celiac patients.[ 15 ] However, the safety of oats in a GFD has been questioned in some studies due to possible contamination of the oats with gluten-containing cereals[ 16 , 17 ] during growing cycle in the farm, cleaning, transportation, storage, or processing. Therefore, it is necessary to extend strategies that would supply uncontaminated oats. The Professional Advisory Board of the Canadian Celiac Association in cooperation with Health Canada had reviewed the literatures on pure oat safety in celiac disease and had recommended the consumption of only limited amount of pure oats about 20–25 g/day (65 ml or ¼-cup dry-rolled oats) for celiac children and 50–70 g/day (125–175 ml or ½ to 3/4-cup dry-rolled oats) for celiac adults.[ 18 ] Fermented oat slurry provides a yoghurt-type product that can be used by patients with celiac disease, lactose intolerance, or a milk allergy.[ 19 ] Moreover, oat β-glucans are technologically feasible thickening agents in soups and have high acceptance among consumers.[ 13 ]

Pseudocereals

In contrast to the most common grains, pseudocereals are composed mainly of albumins and globulins and contain very little or no storage prolamin proteins;[ 18 ] thus, they are good substitutes for cereal in GF foods. The nutritional values of wheat and different important GF flour are compared in Table 1 .[ 18 ]

Certain mineral content of pseudocereals

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is JRMS-23-109-g001.jpg

Amaranth consists of small seeds with a nutritional value better than that of any other vegetable, including cereals, and much higher amounts of fiber and minerals than any other GF grain. It has a high amount of lysine, arginine, tryptophan, and sulfur-containing amino acids.[ 20 ] Amaranth flour has already been used to enrich cereal-based foods, including GF pasta.[ 21 ] Amaranth bread, which has higher levels of protein, fiber, and minerals, is acceptable for celiac patients.[ 20 ] A mixture of popped and raw amaranth flour produces bread loaves with a higher specific volume and more homogeneous crumb than other kinds of GF bread.[ 21 ]

Quinoa protein is rich in lysine, methionine, and cysteine. Thus, it is a good complement for legumes, which have low methionine and cysteine. In addition, quinoa is a relatively good source of Vitamin E and B-group vitamins and has high levels of calcium, iron, and phosphorous. It also has a suitable fatty acid composition.[ 22 ] Dogan and Karwe demonstrated that quinoa could be used to make a novel, healthy, extruded snack product. Quinoa's high lipid and low amylase contents make it necessary to have a high shear in extrusion cooking.[ 23 ]

Buckwheat seeds contain fagopyritols, a type of soluble carbohydrates. Fagopyritols are a source of D-chiro-inositol, a compound that has shown efficiency in patients with noninsulin-dependent diabetes through improved glycemic control. Buckwheat has a low glycemic index and also shows a beneficial effect on human health, lowering blood pressure and helping cholesterol metabolism.[ 24 ] Replacement of cornstarch with buckwheat flour in GF bread has been shown to have a positive effect on bread texture and delays staling because of buckwheat flour's lower starch gelatinization enthalpy.[ 25 ] Utilization of buckwheat in the production of GF crackers leads to a product with acceptable sensory qualities.[ 26 ] Buckwheat and quinoa breads have a higher volume than other kinds of GF breads.

Schoenlechner et al . compared different characteristics of amaranth, quinoa, and buckwheat pasta. They found that the firmness and cooking time of amaranth pasta was lower than those for the other flours, while the cooking loss of quinoa pasta was greater than other flours. Decreasing the moisture content to 30% and using higher amount of egg white powder and emulsifier (distilled monoglycerides) led to a firmness that was more acceptable than that for the wheat pasta.[ 22 ]

Maize's high yields have made it a key crop in ensuring food availability and promoting food security.[ 27 ] It is recommended as a safe source for the production of GF pasta. In addition, products such as curls, puffs, and balls can be produced by extrusion cooking of maize grits or meal, and fried snack products such as tortilla chips can be made from alkaline-processed maize. Breakfast cereals such as flakes, shreds, granules, puffs, or other forms can also be produced from maize.[ 13 ]

One good source of nutrients, especially fiber, calcium, and other minerals, is millet.[ 28 ] Protein makes up about 7%–12% of the grain. Lysine is a limiting amino acid in millet, while tryptophan and threonine are not deficient.[ 9 ] The best-known flat breads produced from millet are injera, kisra (fermented), and roti (unfermented). Injera made from millet stales much more slowly than that made from sorghum or other cereals. Teff is a kind of millet that has protein content similar to the other cereals (10%–12%) and is a good source of minerals, particularly calcium and iron. The main use of teff grain in human food is in injera.[ 29 ] Teff starch has a slow retrogradation rate that delays bread staling.[ 13 , 30 ] Millet's lysine deficiency can be overcome by blending it with a lysine-rich flour such as legume flours. Baby foods, snack foods,[ 31 ] and breakfast cereals[ 32 ] are other products made from millet. Germinated, popped, and roasted millet flours have been used along with milk solids, legume flour, and other cereals for the production of complementary and infant foods.[ 33 ]

White, pleasant-tasting, and GF flour can be produced from sorghum.[ 34 ] The nutrition quality of sorghum protein is poor, as sorghum is deficient in essential amino acids. Malting can increase lysine and improve protein quality.[ 35 ] Breads produced from sorghum have lower volume than wheat bread.[ 36 ] For sorghum bread, soft batters rather than firmer dough are required to obtain sufficient rise and good elasticity without brittleness; thus, more water is generally required.[ 34 ] In GF products, gas cells should be surrounded by liquid films and stabilized by surface-active substances such as polar lipids, soluble proteins, and soluble pentosans; these are present in sorghum, making it suitable for producing bread without any additives. However, using hydrocolloids could improve sorghum bread's quality.[ 34 ] Various researchers have studied the effect of using different additives on sorghum bread quality. Some of these studies are presented in Table 2 . Sorghum flours have also been used to produce biscuits, granolas, infant food, and snack foods such as crisps and chips.[ 35 , 37 ]

Different gluten substitute used in different gluten-free food

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is JRMS-23-109-g002.jpg

Chestnut flour contains high-quality proteins with 4%–7% essential amino acids, 20%–32% sugar, 50%–60% starch, 4%–10% dietary fiber, 2%–4% fat, and some vitamins and minerals, such as B-group vitamins and Vitamin E, phosphorous, magnesium, and potassium. Since the amounts of Vitamin B, iron, folate, and dietary fiber are not sufficient in most GF flour, the use of chestnut flour seems to be advantageous for improving nutritional value. Unfortunately, the qualities of chestnut bread, such as volume and color, are not suitable because of weak interactions between components of the chestnut dough,[ 1 ] inadequate starch gelatinization, and high amounts of sugar and fiber. This flour is more suitable for pastry making.[ 38 ] However, blending chestnut flour with other flours such as rice flour[ 38 ] and adding some hydrocolloids such as guar gum, xanthan gum, or hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC)[ 1 ] can help to overcome these problems.

The chia ( Salvia hispanica L.) seed and flour were one of the main staple foods in Central America. It attracts a great deal of interest due to its nutritional and functional potential in food and pharmaceutical industries. The chia seed is a good source of phenolic compounds, dietary fiber (20%–37%), protein (18%–25%), and oil (21%–33%) with approximately 60%–63% α-linolenic acid. Sandri et al . used chia flour, potato starch, and rice flour in a GF bread formulation by application of mixture design and response surface methodology to achieve the best sensory properties. They found no suitable physical and sensory properties when whole chia flour alone was used. After that, 5%, 10%, and 14% whole chia flour was added to GF bread-containing rice flour as a main ingredient that led to negligibly decrease in crumb moisture, crumb firmness, and loaf volume.[ 39 ] Huerta et al . observed no significant differences in replacing rice and soy flour with 2.5%, 5.0%, and 7.5% whole chia flour in specific volume, baking loss, and sensory acceptability (scores ranging from 4.5 to 5.5, on a 7-point hedonic scale) on GF bread in comparison to control.[ 40 ] In another study, 2.5%–7.5% whole chia flour was used in chestnut flour-based GF bread formulation. They found improved in the dough rheological properties of elasticity, viscosity, and stability up to using 7.5% chia flour.[ 41 , 42 ] Steffolani et al . found that replacing of rice flour with 15% whole chia flour reduced the specific volume, darkened the GFB color, and increased the bread hardness but does not have significant effect on overall acceptability.[ 43 ]

Breads produced from legumes such as pea isolate, chickpea flour, soya flour, or carob germ flour showed good sensory profiles and physicochemical characteristics. Carob germ flour produced batters with good rheological characteristics, but its bread had poor properties. However, chickpea flour and pea isolate kinds of bread obtained good results in all parameters.[ 44 ] In another study, Gularte et al . made GF cake using chickpea, pea, lentil, and bean flours along with rice in a proportion of 50:50. Application of legume flours, especially lentil, led to lower batter viscosity and consequently higher specific volume than in the control sample. In addition, lentil-enriched cakes showed similar crumb hardness and higher springiness than the control cake. In terms of nutritional quality, legumes have a higher protein content and protein availability than cereals; this makes legumes as a recommended flour for enriching GF cakes.[ 45 ] Tsatsaragkou et al . (2014) showed replacing 15% of rice flour with carob flour resulted in the production of GF bread with better crumb structure and color, and lower moisture loss but harder crumbs and lower specific volume than rice bread. The decrease in size of carob flour led to a slower rate of firming.[ 46 ]

DIFFERENT CHALLENGES ENCOUNTERED IN USING GLUTEN-FREE FOOD

A comparison between GF commercial foods and their gluten-containing counterparts shows that GF food is more expensive.[ 47 ] The price of one loaf of GF bread is two or three times that of regular bread. Activities such as baking celiac-specific cereal products, buying foods in large quantities with friends or support-group members, and choosing longer lasting products such as carrots, potatoes, and parsnips, seasonal products, and legumes could help patients to reduce food costs.[ 48 ]

Nutritional deficiencies

Between 20% and 38% of celiac patients show nutritional deficiencies: 12%–69% display iron deficiency and 8%–41% display Vitamin B 12 deficiency. In addition, damaged villi in celiac patients lead to lactose intolerance because of decreased lactase production, resulting in phosphorus, calcium, and Vitamin D deficiencies.[ 47 ]

Using starches and refined flours with low fiber content in GF products leads to inadequate fiber intake.[ 47 ] The incidence of anemia in newly diagnosed celiac patients was reported as 4% in the United States. Gluten-containing products have higher folate content than their GF counterparts. Therefore, fortification of GF products with folate is essential.[ 49 ] Immediately after diagnosis of a deficiency in these and other micronutrients, GF vitamins and minerals should be added to the patient's diet in therapeutic doses based on individual factors, including laboratory test results, age, overall eating habits, and compliance with the GFD.[ 8 ] Patients should be encouraged to use foods rich in Vitamin B 12 (such as meat, milk, fish, and poultry), folate (such as dried beans and legumes, flax seeds, dark leafy greens, and citrus fruit), heme iron (such as lean meats, poultry, and seafood), and nonheme iron (such as legumes, seeds, and nuts), as well as vitamin C-rich food to increase iron absorption. Pseudocereals such as amaranth, buckwheat, and quinoa are good sources of iron, fiber, and some B vitamins.[ 50 ]

Recent studies showed a high prevalence of obesity in some celiac patients.[ 51 ] Almost half of all adult patients with celiac disease have a body mass index of 25 or more;[ 52 ] however, obesity is more prevalent in celiac children, and it is, therefore, necessary to test for celiac disease in obese children.[ 52 ] Hyper caloric content of commercially available GF foods might be resulted to obesity and weight gain.[ 53 ] Furthermore, damage of intestinal villi can lead to problems in food digestion and absorption that result in obesity.

Bone disease

Consumption of calcium-rich and Vitamin D-rich foods should be recommended throughout patients’ lives, particularly those patients with osteopenic bone disease.[ 54 ] Calcium-rich foods include milk, cheese, and calcium-fortified beverages such as orange or apple juice, and enriched, GF soy, almond, or rice milk, GF yogurt, sardines, or canned salmon with bones.[ 55 ] Vitamin D-rich foods include fatty fish and fish oils, egg yolk, liver, Vitamin D-fortified milk, and some GF enriched beverages; additionally, patients should be encouraged to expose their skin to sunshine during late spring, summer, and early fall.

Lactose intolerance

A common problem for celiac is bloating, gas, and diarrhea; these may indicate lactose intolerance. Lactose consumption should be avoided and limited for one or more months in this situation until lactase enzyme production recovers. Different recommended strategies include using lactose-reduced or lactose-free products such as Lactaid® milk, aged cheese, and GF yogurt with live and active cultures, enriched dairy-free/GF beverages such as soy, almond, or rice milk, and supplementation with GF lactase enzyme supplements.[ 55 ]

Technological challenges

As mentioned before in detail, the quality, mouth-feel, and flavor of GF products are lower than those of conventional wheat products. The elasticity and extensibility of dough and the volume of the loaves are attributed to gluten.[ 56 ] Cereal products baked with different GF cereals (with the exception of oats) have been shown to have lower volume and an inferior physical texture but a slower staling rate than wheat containing samples.[ 57 ] Different additives, such as hydrocolloids, emulsifiers, starch, eggs, and other materials, have been used as improvers in the production of GF products. Some of these additives are discussed in [ Table 2 ].

Hydrocolloids

Hydrocolloids can be applied as gluten substitutes in the production of GF food due to their polymeric structure.[ 32 ] The properties of hydrocolloids used as gluten replacers, such as network forming, film formation, thickening, and water-holding capacity, are useful in the formulation of GF products. Guar gum and xanthan gum are the two most common hydrocolloids used in GF-baked products.[ 9 ] Addition of xanthan to GF formulations leads to a farinograph curve typical of wheat flour dough.[ 58 ] This gum has a positive effect on bread volume and leads to a product with a higher volume than do pectin and guar gum.[ 59 ] Increased xanthan content reduces the hardness of bread.[ 59 ] In addition, when xanthan gum was applied as a network former in the preparation of cornstarch bread, the resulting product had a good specific volume but a coarse crumb texture, without flavor.[ 60 ]

HPMC is a cellulose derivative that has a positive effect on the reduction of cholesterol and has also been used in GF breads to increase loaf volume.[ 61 ] The use of HPMC as a substitute for gluten ensures good gas-retaining and structure-forming properties in the crumb of rice bread.[ 62 ] In fact, a comparative study using different gums (xanthan gum, guar gum, agar, carrageenan, locust bean gum, and HPMC) in a rice–bread formulation showed that HPMC gave the highest specific loaf volume.[ 63 ] The cellulose carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) has been used as a gluten replacer in the production of bread. CMC can increase the porosity and crumb elasticity of bread as well as the overall acceptability of a GF formulation.[ 58 ] When this gum has been used for the production of rice-flour cake, better sensory properties in terms of uniformity, crust property, rupture, aroma, taste, and flavor were obtained in comparison with control rice-flour cake.[ 64 ] Furthermore, an appropriate amount of CMC and HPMC improved rice-cracker texture.[ 65 ]

Pectin,[ 59 ] agarose,[ 59 ] oat β-glucan,[ 58 ] psyllium,[ 66 ] Arabic gum,[ 67 ] konjac,[ 68 ] locust bean gum,[ 56 ] agar-agar,[ 69 ] and guar gum[ 38 ] are other hydrocolloids that have improved the texture, rheology, appearance, sensory perceptions, and general quality of GF formulations. Some authors have investigated the effect of mixture of hydrocolloids.[ 70 ] Sumnu et al . studied the effects of different concentrations of xanthan and guar gums and their blends on the staling of GF rice cakes. They found that a blend of xanthan and guar gum decreased hardness, weight loss, enthalpy of retrogradation, and the change in setback viscosity values of cakes during storage, thus retarding staling.[ 70 ] Using xanthan, CMC, xanthan-guar, xanthan-locust bean, and HPMC have been shown to yield the lowest porosity, the lowest average area of pores, and the highest number of pores; this, in turn, leads to a finer texture of these crumbs along with lower hardness and higher cohesiveness and springiness.[ 38 ]

Starch plays a key role in the texture of many kinds of food products. In some cases, native starch does not provide the functional properties, such as thickening and stabilization, for the production of some special foods. Therefore, starches used in the food industry are often modified to overcome undesirable changes in product appearance and texture caused by retrogradation or breakdown of starch during processing and storage.[ 71 ] The most widely used starches in the food industry are hydroxypropylated, acetylated, and cross-linked starches. Hydroxypropylated starch influences the viscoelastic properties of dough. One of the main factors that could modify the rheological properties of GF modified starch as a part of the dough is water-binding capacity. However, the application of hydroxypropylated starches has not been shown to have a significant impact on pasting characteristics.[ 72 ] Hydroxypropyl distarch phosphate enhances the volume of GF loaves. This is accompanied by a decrease in average cell size and an increase in average cell number.[ 73 ]

Acetylation of starch is an important substitution method used for thickening GF food products.[ 15 ] Like hydroxypropylated starch, acetylated distarch adipate could enhance the volume of GF bread. Addition of modified starch causes a more elastic crumb structure. A slight decrease in the hardness and chewiness of the crumb was also observable on the day of baking.[ 73 ] Application of acetylated starch in cake batter could increase batter viscosity, cake volume, and whiteness of crust.[ 15 ] When high and stable viscosity is required in food, cross-linked starches are used as the thickener. Cross-linked starches play an important role in increasing shear resistance and providing viscous batter.[ 74 ] Cross-linked cornstarch provides stronger and more stable dough and increases the loaf volume.[ 75 ] The use of resistant starch has been shown to elevate zero-shear viscosity and reduce both creep and recovery compliance. Modified starch has shown higher starch gelatinization temperatures and lower viscosity. It has been found that loaves baked with a proportion of resistant starch had a softer crumb than the control sample.[ 76 ] Hydrolysis of some proportions of starch into a low molecular weight using amylolytic enzymes is another method of starch modification. The resulting modified starch, called maltodextrin or dextrin, significantly increases pasting temperature and reduces the viscosity of the obtained pastes. Maltodextrins can attenuate structure and increase deformation sensitivity. The addition of maltodextrins with low dextrose equivalent (DE) decreases loaf volume and causes the deterioration of bread quality. Maltodextrins with the higher DE positively influence bread volume and have a beneficial effect on crumb hardening during storage. Maltodextrin with the highest DE also effectively reduces the recrystallization enthalpy of amylopectin.[ 77 ]

Phongthai and D’Amico (2017) studied the properties of rice-flour-based GF pasta enriched by whey protein concentrate (WP), egg albumen (EB), soy protein (SP) and rice bran protein concentrate, separately. Using WP caused decrease in optimal cooking time. The enrichment of 9% (w/w) EB led to prevent structure from disintegration, improved pasta firmness, and decrease in cooking loss of P < 0.05, whereas using rice bran protein concentrate caused highest cooking loss ( P < 0.05). The GF pasta enrichment with 6% SP concentrate had similar L* values in comparison with commercial sample. Among the four sources of protein tested, EB had the highest potential for improving cooking properties of rice-flour-based GF pasta.[ 78 ]

In addition, application of modified protein could improve the quality of GF products. Deamidated oat protein has been shown to cause lower viscosity, a higher volume, and a darker color.[ 15 ] The substitution of a combination of deamidated protein and acetylated starch could improve oat-flour cake properties.[ 79 ]

GF flour often tends to have reduced fiber compared with products containing gluten. Different fiber sources, such cereal bran, legume outer layer, modified cellulose and resistant starch, and by-products of apple and potato processing, have been used in producing GF products. The replacement of 20% rice flour with a mixture of oat fiber and inulin in GF layer cakes has been shown to increase the cakes’ specific volume and quality.[ 45 ] The degree of polymerization of inulin and the proportion of low-molecular-weight sugars in the recipe could influence dough properties. The incorporation of inulin to dough formulations causes a significant decrease in paste viscosity and an increase in gelatinization temperature. Inulin significantly reduces the enthalpy of retrograded amylopectin, resulting in slower staling.[ 80 ] Addition of rice bran containing a high amount of soluble dietary fiber produces better bread color, a higher specific volume, and softer crumb with a better porosity profile. Furthermore, sensory acceptance increases and shelf life extends in higher levels of soluble dietary fiber.[ 81 ]

Dairy ingredient

The incorporation of dairy ingredients has long been established in the baking industry due to their nutritional and functional benefits, including improved flavor and texture and longer shelf life. Dairy products may be used as a gluten substitute to increase water absorption and enhance the handling properties of the batter.[ 82 ] All powders derived from milk increase crumb hardness with the exception of demineralized whey powder. Sensory analysis has shown a preference for breads containing skim milk, sodium caseinate, and milk protein isolate.[ 56 ] Other novel ingredients, such as calcium-fortified caseinate, were found to be suitable for gluten replacement, where calcium bonds in caseinate played the same role as sulfur-sulfur bonds in gluten.[ 9 ] Another benefit of using dairy products is the doubling of the bread's protein content.[ 56 ]

The enzyme transglutaminase (TGase) (EC 2.3.2.13) has been used in many industries, including dairy, bakery, and meat processing. TGase, a γ-glutamyltransferase, can catalyze the reaction between lysine residues (ε-amino group on protein bound) and glutamine residues (β-carboxamide group on protein bond), which cross-link proteins via covalent bonds, leading to the decrease in the number of free amino groups. TGase was found to have a severe effect on dough water absorption, modifying viscoelastic behavior and enhancing thermal stability.[ 83 ] Furthermore, TGase has a significant effect on the specific volume of bread. Application of skim milk protein with 10 unit of enzyme has been shown to lead to the most compact structure, as reflected in the crumb texture profile. This could be due to the formation of a protein network in GF bread with the addition of TGase.[ 84 ] Another enzyme that affects dough's rheological properties and bread's physical quality is protease. Protease-treated rice bread had better crumb appearance, high volume, soft texture, and slower staling rate, depending on the amount of enzyme added.[ 85 ] The aggregation of partially degraded storage proteins surrounding the starch granules and protein-starch interaction may improve gas retention before baking and increase specific loaf volume.[ 86 ] In another study, application of protease of Aspergillus oryzae on the rheological properties of rice dough showed an increase in batter viscosity and a decrease in flour-settling behavior because of the aggregation of flour particles after partial cleavage of storage proteins.[ 86 ]

The use of sourdough represents an alternative to increase the quality of both gluten-containing and GF breads. Acidification of flour by sourdough fermentation can replace the function of gluten to some extent and enhance the swelling properties of polysaccharides, leading to a better bread structure. It also improves bread volume and crumb structure, flavor, nutritional value, and mold-free shelf life. Sourdough lactic acid bacteria could break down nongluten proteins and starch components, thus increasing the dough elasticity and delaying staling.[ 87 ] Furthermore, long-chain sugar polymers called exo-polysaccharides can be produced by many lactic acid bacteria and act as prebiotics and hydrocolloids to improve the technological as well as nutritional properties of GF breads.[ 87 ] Rühmkorf et al . optimized homoexo-polysaccharide production by lactobacilli in GF sourdoughs to achieve high amounts of exo-polysaccharides.[ 88 ] The complementary peptidases located in the cytoplasm of lactobacilli hydrolyze gluten and reduce its amount to <10 ppm through routine sourdough fermentation.[ 89 ] On the other hand, the proteolytic system of lactic acid bacteria has the ability to hydrolyze α-gliadin fragments and reduce gliadin levels to some extent. Furthermore, the application of these peptidases seems to be a possible technological alternative to reduce the gliadin concentration in wheat dough without using living bacteria as a starter.[ 90 ] Lactic acid bacteria can also produce antifungal, antimycotoxigenic, bioactive, and aroma compounds that have the ability to improve overall bread quality.[ 87 , 91 ]

Other materials

So far, some studies have been conducted in this area using uncommon materials as gluten alternatives. For example, the study of replacing wheat flour with a mixture of GF flours and psyllium showed no change in the preference or acceptability of modified products compared with standard products. Healthful, tasty, and low-cost products could be made at home using this replacement.[ 66 ] Another material, which contains high amounts of protein, dietary fiber, calcium, and ω-3 fatty acids, is the pulpy by-product of soy milk named okara. It can play an important role as a gluten substitute, which develops proper product texture, mouthfeel, and volume after some reformation. Okara has large amounts of fiber that interferes with protein-starch interactions. Decreasing the fiber size can overcome this problem. In addition, in comparison with a commercial GF flour in batter formulations, okara has been suggested as a novel marketable ingredient for the formulation of a variety of GF products.[ 92 ]

NUTRIGENOMICS

As mentioned above, the traditional concept of celiac disease is a chronic inflammatory disorder that identified by malabsorption in human.[ 93 , 99 ] Although celiac disease is treatable by the total lifelong GFD,[ 94 , 100 ] due to mentioned problems, the use of other controlling methods can delay symptoms. Nutrigenomics can be used as a new method for celiac disease control. Nutrigenomics and nutrigenetics are two research fields that elucidate some interactions between diet, nutrients, and genes. Nutrigenomics studies the functional interactions of food with the genome. Some food ingredients such as plant flavonoids, carotenoids, and long-chain ω-3 fatty acids can modulate oxidative stress, gene expression, and production of inflammatory mediators; this modulation activity can preserve the integrity of the intestinal barrier and protect against the toxicity of gliadin peptides; thus, these ingredients can be used in nutritional therapy for celiac disease.[ 93 ] Vitamins C and E can modulate immune responses in several ways, such as via leukocyte function and lymphocyte proliferation. They have also antioxidant activity that leads to modulations of the inflammatory process. Vitamin E, especially γ-tocopherol, decreases the release of the pro-inflammatory cytokines IL-8 and PAI-1. In addition, Vitamin C can inhibit the augmented secretion of interferon-gamma, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, and IL-6 and increase the expression of IL-15 triggered by gliadin; this is beneficial in the treatment of celiac disease.[ 101 ] Other effective compounds on the intestinal epithelial cells are several polyphenols and carotenoids found in fruit and vegetables that have antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. Flavonoids reduce the concentration of prostanoids and leukotrienes through inhibiting the activity of eicosanoid-generating enzymes such as phospholipase A 2 and preventing the induction and expression of inducible nitric oxide synthase in different cell models. In addition, carotenoids can inhibit the expression of enzymes/proteins that play a role in inflammation, partly by suppressing the activation of the transcription factor NF-κB. Other flavonoids such as lycopene, quercetin, tyrosol, epigallocatechin, gallate, genistein, and myricetin also have a protective effect on intestinal-barrier function. On the other hand, fatty acids can act via cell-surface and intracellular receptors/sensors that control inflammatory cell signaling and gene expression patterns. Although eicosanoids produced from ω-6 fatty acids (such as arachidonic acid) have a pro-inflammatory role, eicosanoids from ω-3 fatty acids (such as eicosapentaenoic acid) have anti-inflammatory properties. It has been presented that the release of arachidonic acid from intra-epithelial lymphocytes after incubation with gliadin leads to the activation of cytosolic phospholipase A2 cPLA2, which results in the lymphocyte cytolysis and immune response of celiac disease. Furthermore, it has been shown that docosahexaenoic acid, as a long chain ω-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid, can disturb the pro-inflammatory effects of arachidonic acid.[ 93 , 101 ]

Celiac patients usually need to adhere to a strictly GFD for the rest of their lives. Different GF cereals and additives have been used in GF products; the additives contribute structure-building and water-binding properties to GF-baked goods. The comparison between previous studies showed that pseudocereals and legumes are appropriate choices for making GF products because of their significantly higher levels of protein, fat, fiber, and minerals. From an economic perspective, pseudocereals offer a cheaper alternative to wheat that can help increase dietary compliance by reducing the economic pressure of a GFD. Each method for the production of GF food suffers from limitations, such as nutrition deficiency or deterioration of functional properties. As a result, the unpalatability and weak functional properties must overcome while maintaining nutritional value and safety.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

Information

Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

Active Journals
Find a Journal
Proceedings Series
For Authors
For Reviewers
For Editors
For Librarians
For Publishers
For Societies
For Conference Organizers
Open Access Policy
Institutional Open Access Program
Special Issues Guidelines
Editorial Process
Research and Publication Ethics
Article Processing Charges
Testimonials
Preprints.org
SciProfiles
Encyclopedia

Article Menu

Subscribe SciFeed
Recommended Articles
Google Scholar
on Google Scholar
Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Effects of short-term gluten-free diet on cardiovascular biomarkers and quality of life in healthy individuals: a prospective interventional study.

Share and Cite

Lange, S.; Tsohataridis, S.; Boland, N.; Ngo, L.; Hahad, O.; Münzel, T.; Wild, P.; Daiber, A.; Schuppan, D.; Lurz, P.; et al. Effects of Short-Term Gluten-Free Diet on Cardiovascular Biomarkers and Quality of Life in Healthy Individuals: A Prospective Interventional Study. Nutrients 2024 , 16 , 2265. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16142265

Lange S, Tsohataridis S, Boland N, Ngo L, Hahad O, Münzel T, Wild P, Daiber A, Schuppan D, Lurz P, et al. Effects of Short-Term Gluten-Free Diet on Cardiovascular Biomarkers and Quality of Life in Healthy Individuals: A Prospective Interventional Study. Nutrients . 2024; 16(14):2265. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16142265

Lange, Simon, Simeon Tsohataridis, Niklas Boland, Lisa Ngo, Omar Hahad, Thomas Münzel, Philipp Wild, Andreas Daiber, Detlef Schuppan, Philipp Lurz, and et al. 2024. "Effects of Short-Term Gluten-Free Diet on Cardiovascular Biomarkers and Quality of Life in Healthy Individuals: A Prospective Interventional Study" Nutrients 16, no. 14: 2265. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16142265

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, supplementary material.

ZIP-Document (ZIP, 144 KiB)

Further Information

Mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

COMMENTS

A Systematic Review on Gluten-Free Bread Formulations Using Specific Volume as a Quality Indicator
2.1.1. Inclusion Criteria . The inclusion criteria were experimental studies that evaluated the technological, physical-chemical, and/or sensory properties of gluten-free bread (GFB) and presented specific volume above 3.5 cm 3 /g as a GFB quality parameter [52,53].Studies show that commercial wheat bread's specific volume varies between 3.5 and 5.5 cm 3 /g [48,54,55,56,57,58,59].
Recent practical researches in the development of gluten-free breads
The quantitative decrease of free amino groups of proteins suggested that this improvement was due to the cross-linking of protein, that is, the generation of a gluten substitute, supplementing the role of HPMC in the baking of rice bread. 62 Microstructure analyses of a rice-based bread fortified with skim milk or egg powder using confocal ...
Recent developments in gluten-free bread baking approaches: A review
Several approaches have been applied to understand and improve gluten-free bread (GFB) elaboration and further studies are still required. ... Gluten-Free Research. J ournal of F ood Science, 79(6 ...
Physicochemical, nutritional, and functional characterization of gluten
1. Introduction. Gluten-free (GF) diet, being the only effective treatment for individuals suffering from gluten-related disorders and health trend for other people, is shifting focus towards new market for GF foods and beverages (Le Loan, Thuy, Le Tri, & Sunghoon, 2021).In fact, the market size of GF products is estimated to reach USD 7.5 billion with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 7 ...
Improvement of gluten‐free bread and cake properties using natural
1 INTRODUCTION. The main wheat component responsible for bread and cake quality is gluten. Gluten plays a principal role in bread and cake development by giving cohesiveness and promoting the retention of the CO 2 produced during fermentation. The gas expansion causes wheat breads to gain volume and attain acceptable crumb texture (Elgeti, Jekle, & Becker, 2015; Le-Bail et al., 2011; Martínez ...
Gluten-free bakery products: Ingredients and processes
Gluten-free bread doughs are less viscous and less elastic (less consistent), and their lower consistency makes a higher specific volume possible. ... (2019) in their research on commercial gluten-free products, identified that hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC) is the most commonly used gluten substitute, followed by xanthan gum, psyllium ...
(PDF) A Systematic Review of Gluten-Free Dough and Bread: Dough
A Systematic Review of Gluten-Free Dough and Bread: Dough Rheology, Bread Characteristics, and Improvement Strategies September 2020 Applied Sciences 10(18):6559
Texture profile analysis and sensory evaluation of ...
The need for better quality gluten-free (GF) bread is constantly growing. This can be ascribed to the rising incidence of celiac disease or other gluten-associated allergies and the widespread incorrect public belief, that GF diet is healthier. Although there is a remarkable scientific interest shown to this topic, among the numerous studies only a few deals with commercially available ...
Foods
This research aims to enhance the nutritional value of gluten-free bread by incorporating a diverse range of components, including additives with beneficial effects on human health, e.g., dietary fibers. The research was focused on improving the texture, taste, and nutritional content of gluten-free products by creating new recipes and including novel biological additives. The goal was to ...
A Systematic Review of Gluten-Free Dough and Bread: Dough Rheology
High-quality, gluten-free doughs and bakery products are clearly more difficult to produce than wheat flour-based products. The poor quality of the breads that are currently available demonstrates that manufacturing remains a significant technological problem. This is mainly due to the absence of gluten, which has a huge negative impact on dough rheology and bread characteristics. Gluten ...
Recent practical researches in the development of gluten-free breads
Recent attempts have included the use of redox regulation as well as particle-stabilized foam. In this short review, we introduce the ongoing advancements in the development of gluten-free bread, by our laboratory as well as others, focusing mainly on rice-based breads. The social and scientific contexts of these efforts are also mentioned ...
Delving into the Role of Dietary Fiber in Gluten-Free Bread
The evidenced relevance of dietary fibers (DF) as functional ingredients shifted the research focus towards their incorporation into gluten-free (GF) bread, aiming to attain the DF contents required for the manifestation of health benefits. Numerous studies addressing the inclusion of DF from diverse sources rendered useful information regarding the role of DF in GF batter's rheological ...
Gluten-Free Bread and Bakery Products Technology
Gluten-free bread and other gluten-free bakery products are very unusual for a consumer accustomed to classic wheat or wheat-rye bread. Toth et al. ... Arendt E.K. Advances in Gluten Free Cereal Research. School of Food and Nutritional Sciences, University College Cork; Cork, Ireland: 2016. [(accessed on 29 January 2022)].
Recent practical researches in the development of gluten-free breads
The gluten-free products market was valued at USD 4.18 billion in 2017 and this is projected to reach USD 6.47 billion by 2023, at a compound average growth rate of 7.6% during the forecast period ...
Gluten‐Free Breads: The Gap Between Research and Commercial Reality
The market for gluten-free products is steadily growing and gluten-free bread (GFB) keeps on being one of the most challenging products to develop. Although numerous research studies have worked on improving the manufacture of GFBs, some have adopted approaches far from commercial reality.
(PDF) Gluten-Free Bread and Bakery Products Technology
wheat, rye, barley, oats or their hybrids and derivatives that some people are intolerant. to and that is insoluble in water and 0.5 M sodium chloride solution. W ater-insoluble. prolamins and ...
High Protein Rice Flour in the Development of Gluten-Free Bread
Bread was chosen as the focus for testing higher protein rice flour (HPR). HPR were compared to commercial rice flours (CW) for pasting properties, protein, fat, and fiber content. Gluten-free bread was prepared and tested for color and texture. A consumer sensory study rated appearance, aroma, texture, and taste of the breads.
Gluten-Free Bread and Bakery Products Technology
Gluten, a protein fraction from wheat, rye, barley, oats, their hybrids and derivatives, is very important in baking technology. The number of people suffering from gluten intolerance is growing worldwide, and at the same time, the need for foods suitable for a gluten-free diet is increasing. Bread and bakery products are an essential part of the daily diet. Therefore, new naturally gluten ...
Effect of hydrocolloid type on physicochemical and sensory
Gluten-free white bread making using local composite flour is currently increasingly being studied. However, the characteristics of the gluten-free white bread produced are not as good as using wheat flour. The use of hydrocolloids is needed to optimize the quality of the white bread produced. This research aimed to examine the effect of hydrocolloid types on the physicochemical and sensory ...
Development, Analysis, and Sensory Evaluation of Improved Bread
In response to the demand for healthier foods in the current market, this study aimed to develop a new bread product using a fermented food product (FFP), a plant-based product composed of soya flour, alfalfa meal, barley sprouts, and viable microorganisms that showed beneficial effects in previous studies.
Gluten‐free bakery and pasta products: prevalence and quality
Introduction. Gluten includes a mixture of over one hundred proteins prevalent in grains, for example, wheat, rye, spelt and barley (Wieser, 1996).For people born with certain health conditions, and as humans age, the gluten in wheat can cause problems (Armstrong et al., 2012; Aronsson et al., 2015; Fritz & Chen, 2017).There are three main forms that human reacts towards gluten intake ...
(PDF) A Review on the Gluten-Free Diet: Technological ...
Discover the world's research. 25+ million members; 160+ million publication pages; 2.3+ billion citations; ... In gluten-free bread products, emulsiﬁers such as diacetyl tartaric esters of ...
Advanced properties of gluten-free cookies, cakes, and crackers: A
Highlights. •. Gluten-free non-bread bakeries of cookie, biscuit, cake, and cracker are reviewed. •. Rice and its composite flours are widely used for gluten-free bakery products. •. Flour composition and formulation dominate dough/batter and product properties. •. Achieving desired flour functionality and sensory quality is yet ...
Gluten-free products in celiac disease: Nutritional and technological
The prevalence of celiac disease is <0.5%-1% worldwide. [ 2] Gluten is the storage protein of wheat and includes glutenin and alcohol-soluble gliadin. Gliadin and other prolamins in rye (secalins) and barley (hordeins) are toxic for patients with celiac disease. [ 3] A gluten-free diet (GFD) is the mainstay of celiac disease treatment. [ 3]
Nutrients
Introduction: The exposome concept includes nutrition as it significantly influences human health, impacting the onset and progression of diseases. Gluten-containing wheat products are an essential source of energy for the world's population. However, a rising number of non-celiac healthy individuals tend to reduce or completely avoid gluten-containing cereals for health reasons. Aim and ...

Texture profile analysis and sensory evaluation of commercially available gluten-free bread samples

Cite this article

Similar content being viewed by others

Semi‐volume gluten‐free bread: effect of guar gum, sodium caseinate and transglutaminase enzyme on the quality parameters

Technological Aspects of Gluten Free Bread

Gluten-Free Breadmaking: Facts, Issues, and Future

Introduction

Materials and methods

Texture measurement

Sensory evaluation

Data analysis

Results and discussion

Texture profile changes

Availability of data and material

Acknowledgements

Author information

Corresponding author

Ethics declarations

Compliance with ethics requirements

Ethical approval

Additional information

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article

Save citation to file

Add to My Bibliography

Recent practical researches in the development of gluten-free breads

Conflict of interest statement

Similar articles

Publication types

Related information

Research Materials

Recent practical researches in the development of gluten-free breads

Similar content being viewed by others

Sustainable plant-based ingredients as wheat flour substitutes in bread making

Strategies to improve wheat for human health

Physico-chemical properties of an innovative gluten-free, low-carbohydrate and high protein-bread enriched with pea protein powder

Modern wheat breadmaking

Social demand for gluten-free food

Gluten-free “lifestylers”

Developments of gluten-free breads

Application of the redox regulation

Additive-free, gluten-free rice bread

Acknowledgements

Author information

Corresponding author

Ethics declarations

Additional information

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article

This article is cited by

Semi‐volume gluten‐free bread: effect of guar gum, sodium caseinate and transglutaminase enzyme on the quality parameters

Fortification of traditional egg pasta (erişte) with edible insects: nutritional quality, cooking properties and sensory characteristics evaluation

Quick links

Gluten-free products in celiac disease: Nutritional and technological challenges and solutions

Nafiseh Soltanizadeh

Parisa Mirmoghtadaee

Parisa Banavand

INTRODUCTION

DIFFERENT SOURCE OF GLUTEN-FREE FLOUR

Pseudocereals

DIFFERENT CHALLENGES ENCOUNTERED IN USING GLUTEN-FREE FOOD

Nutritional deficiencies

Bone disease

Lactose intolerance

Technological challenges

Hydrocolloids

Dairy ingredient

Other materials

NUTRIGENOMICS

Financial support and sponsorship

Information

Initiatives

Article Menu

JSmol Viewer

Share and Cite

Article Metrics

Further Information

COMMENTS