↓ Skip to main content

Germination of Oat and Quinoa and Evaluation of the Malts as Gluten Free Baking Ingredients

Overview of attention for article published in Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
Title
Germination of Oat and Quinoa and Evaluation of the Malts as Gluten Free Baking Ingredients
Published in
Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, February 2013
DOI 10.1007/s11130-013-0335-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Outi E. Mäkinen, Emanuele Zannini, Elke K. Arendt

Abstract

Germination can be used to improve the sensory and nutritional properties of cereal and pseudocereal grains. Oat and quinoa are rich in minerals, vitamins and fibre while quinoa also contains high amounts of protein of a high nutritional value. In this study, oat and quinoa malts were produced and incorporated in a rice and potato based gluten free formulation. Germination of oat led to a drastic increase of α-amylase activity from 0.3 to 48 U/g, and minor increases in proteolytic and lipolytic activities. Little change was observed in quinoa except a decrease in proteolytic activity from 9.6 to 6.9 U/g. Oat malt addition decreased batter viscosities at both proofing temperature and during heating. These changes led to a decrease in bread density from 0.59 to 0.5 g/ml and the formation of a more open crumb, but overdosing of oat malt deteriorated the product as a result of excessive amylolysis during baking. Quinoa malt had no significant effect on the baking properties due to low α-amylase activity. Despite showing a very different impact on the bread quality, both malts influenced the electrophoretic patterns of rice flour protein similarly. This suggests that malt induced proteolysis does not influence the technological properties of a complex gluten free formulation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 104 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 20%
Researcher 11 10%
Student > Master 11 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 9%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 28 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 36 34%
Chemistry 8 8%
Engineering 7 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 36 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 August 2013.
All research outputs
#18,332,122
of 22,701,287 outputs
Outputs from Plant Foods for Human Nutrition
#536
of 701 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,366
of 282,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Foods for Human Nutrition
#5
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,701,287 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 701 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 282,969 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.