The Influence of the Addition of Rosehip Powder to Wheat Flour on the Dough Farinographic Properties and Bread Physico-Chemical Characteristics

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Overall, the manuscript is well written and interesting and the authors show that the potential of substitution of ascorbic acid by rosehip powder. I wish the authors had included some graphs and plots of their important results rather than presenting everything in tables.

Also, plese maintain consistency of use of rosehip and Rp in the text. I recommend the author use Rp throughout the text after they introduce Rp.

Revise and refine abstract and conclusions sections.

Author Response

Thank you for your positive statement and comments that helped us improve the manuscript.

Initially, all results were processed as graphs, one for each parameter. Because they were numerous, took up too much space in the manuscript, and were relatively simple and similar, we decided to present the results more concisely in the tables and leave room for discussion.

Rosehip powder has been replaced with Rp in the abstract and the body of the manuscript after being introduced. See (L15, 17, 21, 27) of the abstract, (L83, 96, 97, 116, 117, 137, 138, 160, „62, 163, 166, 170, 185, 186, 200, 201, 235, 246, 248, 257, 344, 387. 390) of the manuscript content.

The recommendation was also applied to wheat flour (WF) and wheat flour mixtures with rosehip powder (WF-Rp).

The entire manuscript was revised following the suggestions and recommendations of all reviewers.

Thank you

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This study deals with the production of bread using wheat flour mixed with rosehip powder and ascorbic acid as an improver. The aim is to verify if bread produced with this rosehip powder, which has important nutritive properties, shows adequate technological/textural characteristics. The article is very well written and argued. The results section shows several comparisons among obtained data and literature. I just have one important recommendation, most of the cited literature is not so recent although there are a lot of recent studies that can be cited appropriately along the manuscript. I suggest substituting or integrating the reference with more recent literature (from 2017 onwards), this could improve the motivation and importance of your work nowadays. I would also ask the authors to specify which device did they use to knead the dough. You can find the comments in their specific location highlighted in the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for your comments and suggestions that helped us improve the manuscript.

The device used to knead the dough was a Diosna dough mixer with a removable bowl, 12 kg maximum dough capacity, and 0.44/0.9 kW motor power. It is mentioned in the revised manuscript (L139-140):

„Mixing and kneading were performed in a Diosna dough mixer with a removable bowl, 12 kg maximum dough capacity, and 0.44/0.9 kW motor power.”

An additional sentence was inserted before (L138-139) to clarify the use of the Diosna device in terms of capacity:

„The quantities were calculated for 3 kg wheat flour to obtain around 5 kg of dough.”

Thank you for the recommended references:

Some of them were cited and included in the list of references. Unfortunately, Tran et al. (2020) and McCann et al. (2018) could not be mentioned.

Tran et al. (2020) investigated the gluten content, protein fraction composition, glutenin, baking quality and rheological properties using the mixolab device. They did not determine water absorption or mention it in the paper.

McCann et al. (2018) formulated four flour blends using high amylose wheat flour, vital wheat gluten and high amylose wheat starch or commercial wheat starch. They did not determine the water absorption, only the moisture. Water absorption is mentioned in the title of Table 1 but is missing from the table.

Thank you.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This study evaluates the effect of supplementing the white flour with rosehip powder on the farinographic properties of flour and mixtures and physico-chemical characteristics of the final bread products.  Some changes are needed as follows:

chapter 2.2. Proximate composition

The used samples were wheat flour, rosehip powder and mixtures. The authors use 6.25 Kjeldahl factor which is not correct for wheat samples.

chapter 2.3. Farinographic measurements

The softening degree of dough should be expressed in BU and not in min.

line 161: in the text there is a moisture value of 13.90% and in the table it is 14.13%.

line 165: in the text there is a ash value of 0.67 % and in the table it is 0.70%.

Table 1: There is chaos in describing homogeneous groups, once group "a" is assigned to the highest value and then to the lowest. It should be standardized.

chapter 3.1. Discussion should be corrected. At times it does not seem to refer to the discussed parameters.

Table 2: There is chaos in describing homogeneous groups. The description of homogeneous groups should depend on the value. Either we start with "a" and then a> b> c> d> or vice versa a <b <c <d. It is very confused and illogical here. In QN we have the homogenous groups "a" and "ab" and there is no "b". It can't be like that.

line 371: The wrong abbreviation was used - TD, not DT.
line 402: There should be -  Table 4 and this is Table 3.

Table 3: There is chaos in describing homogeneous groups. The description of homogeneous groups should depend on the value. Either we start with "a" and then a> b> c> d> or vice versa a <b <c <d. It is very confused and illogical here. In Specific volume, at value 167.06 (WF-Rp 2.5%) there should be an "ab" group, not "bc".

 

 

Author Response

Thank you for the review, for reading the manuscript carefully, and for your corrective comments and suggestions, which helped us improve the manuscript.

Thank you for your observation. Indeed, according to AACC method 46-11.02, the conversion factor of nitrogen into protein for bread, wheat and wheat flour is 5.7 (6.25 is used for other grains and samples of unknown sources). The information has been corrected and completed (L121-122):

„ …using a nitrogen-to-protein conversion factor of 6.25 for Rp and 5.7 for wheat flour and flour mixtures (AACC method 46-11.02 [38])”.

Also, the values for the protein content were corrected in Table 1 and anywhere mentioned in the manuscript (L184-185).

The observation shows how carefully you read the manuscript. The error has been corrected (L133 in the revised manuscript).

The error has been corrected; the value of 13.90% was replaced with 14.13% and „2.0% and” added before 2.5% (L170 in the revised manuscript).

Indeed, the value 0.67% is wrong used since it represents the ash content of the flour mixture with 2.0% Rp. This value was replaced with 0.70%, as in Table 1 (L179 in the revised manuscript).

It is true. There was chaos in describing homogeneous groups in all four tables. The LCD test was performed using Excel, heavy and laborious work and entirely inadequate.

Thanks to a colleague who helped us, we used the Statgraphics Centurion XVI.I software for the revision of the manuscript and the use of letters showing significant or nonsignificant differences between means are correctly assigned, the group „a” is used for the lowest value(s).

A correction has also been done below the tables in the Notes: „the values are statistically different at 95.0% confidence level.”

Moreover, Chapter 2.6. Statistical analysis was completed with (L155-157):

„Fisher’s least significant difference (LSD) test at a 95.0% confidence level used to determine differences between values was applied using the Statgraphics Centurion XVI.I software.”

We feel sorry for not seeing the point. We reread the discussion and checked the references. Each parameter was discussed based on our results and compared with literature data. If there will be a second revision, please be more specific.

TD was replaced with DT (L377 in the revised manuscript).

The error has been corrected; Table 3 replaced Table 4 (L406).

 

Thank you

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

The manuscript entitled: “Influence of Rosehip Powder Addition in Wheat Flour on Dough Farinographic Properties and Bread Physico-chemical Characteristics” reports a study on wheat flour substituted with 0.5–2.5% of rosehip powder. Many data are reported on technolgical aspectes of breadmaking using resehip powder. The manuscript is interesting nonetheless there asome points to better address before possible consideration for publication in the Journal as detailed in the following.

Which yeast has been used? Please specify. The apparatus used for mixing and kneading should be mentioned. The experimental section should be better assessed and more information given. The water/moisture content and activity has been determined? Please specify in section 3.1, where data should be added.

Line 250, please avoid to mention “not published data” and indicate the criteria based on which the amount or rosehip powder has been set to be added to wheat flour

The bread making procedure mention “Dizing breadmaking company” and after the used procedure is described. Is it necessary to mention the company?

The rosehip powder content of vitamin before baking should be given and compared to the resulted bread containing the powder added. In short, the end points of the manuscript should be better exploited: the point has been to functionalize the bread? A taste evaluation has been done? The amount of vitamin C decreased as expected (see line 536-537 in the Conclusion section). The differences that can be noted are as overall quite low between the reference bread and the added bread. It should be explained better the relevance of the addition of this rosehip powder. The advantages and limits of the study should be better addressed and cleared in the text and in the Conclusions section.

Author Response

Thank you for the review. It helps us clarify some parts of the manuscript and improve it.

Compressed yeast has been used as already stated in L99 and L131 (original manuscript) or L105 and L136 (revised manuscript). Information on the compressed yeast trademark (Pakmaya) and its producer was added in section 2.1. Materials (L106-107):

„Pakmaya compressed yeast was produced by Rompak SRL, Pașcani, Iași County, Romania.”

The apparatus used for mixing and kneading is mentioned in the revised manuscript (L139-140): „Mixing and kneading were performed in a Diosna dough mixer with a removable bowl, 12 kg maximum dough capacity, and 0.44/0.9 kW motor power.”

An additional sentence was inserted before (L138-139) to clarify the use of the Diosna device in terms of capacity:

„The quantities were calculated for 3 kg wheat flour to obtain around 5 kg of dough.”

Section 3.1. refers to the proximate composition of flours (control white flour and flour mixtures with rosehip powder addition). The moisture content of flours was determined, presented in Table 1 and discussed in L166-172.

The water/moisture content and activity of compressed yeast were not particularly determined. Usually, Pakmaya compressed bakery yeast (according to the analysis bulletin of Rompack laboratory) has a moisture content of 70–75%, proteins 15.5%, carbohydrates 12–14.5%. The yeast used was similar to the one used in the production at the Dizing company, fresh and with good results. The research design did not aim to study the influence of yeast on the dough and bread properties.

The suggestion helped us clarify and state the criteria based on the amount of rosehip powder that has been set to be added to wheat flour without mentioning „not published data.”

Usually, the wheat flour is supplemented with 2 to 10 g ascorbic acid per 100 kg flour (10 mg/100 g), the higher quantities in the interval being used for flour with lower quality indicators. Extensive preliminary researches showed us that adding a rosehip powder quantity that provides more ascorbic acid led to bread with lower quality indicators. Based on the vitamin C content of rosehip powder (L153 in the original manuscript, L162 in the revised manuscript, Table 1) before the addition to flour, we selected the levels of rosehip powder addition used in the research 0.5–2.5 %.

Therefore, the information presented in L249-250 (original manuscript): „The Rp additions were selected based on previous results (not published data).” was replaced with:

„The Rp additions were selected based on the regular supplementation of wheat flour with ascorbic acid and the vitamin C content of Rp. Usually, the wheat flour is supplemented with 2 to 10 g ascorbic acid per 100 kg flour (10 mg/100 g), the higher quantities in the interval being used for flour with lower quality indicators. Calculations based on the vitamin C content of Rp just before the addition to flour (420 ± 16.09 mg/100 g) served to the selection of Rp addition levels used in the research 0.5–2.5 %.”

Further, this information has been moved to section 2.1. Materials, L99-104.

The mention of „Dizing breadmaking company” is necessary because core research was performed there. However, it has been moved at the end of section „2.4. Breadmaking procedure”, where it is emphasized that only proofing (additional leavening) and baking were accomplished on the technological flow of the company.

The vitamin content of rosehip powder before baking is three times given in the manuscript: in the abstract (L19), section 3.1. Proximate composition of flours (L153 in the original manuscript, L163 in the revised manuscript), and Table 1.

The role of vitamin C / ascorbic acid in breadmaking is explained in section 1. Introduction (L53-61). It participates in the ascorbate – glutathione cycle or Halliwell–Asada cycle, where it accelerates the endogenous glutathione consumption allowing the formation of a stronger gluten network. Vitamin C is thermosensitive and destroyed during baking due to high temperatures. Therefore, the bread does not contain vitamin C or only contains traces. We did not detect vitamin C in bread.

The addition of rosehip powder in bread was not meant to obtain functional bread. The aim was to study if it could be used as a natural ingredient to replace the synthetic ascorbic acid in breadmaking, as presented and explained alongside the manuscript, e.g., Featured Application (L9-12), Abstract (L15-16, 27-28), Introduction (L66-84), etc. Of course, the rosehip powder brought some important fibres to bread whose quantity influenced some dough parameters (e.g., water absorption) and bread colour, which could be a discussion about bread functionalizing. However, it was not the aim of the research, as stated before.

Sensory analysis was performed using the 20-points method and hedonic test. However, it was designed and used in another manuscript. The research presented in this manuscript is a part of a comprehensive study aiming to investigate the influence of rosehip powder addition in wheat flour on the rheological properties of the dough (farinographic, extensographic, rheofementographic, etc.) and bread quality.

The manuscript does not contain a statement about „The amount of vitamin C decreased as expected.” L536-537 (original manuscript) or L540-543 (revised manuscript) include a conclusion on the variation of some farinographic parameters as influenced by the rosehip powder addition, ascorbic acid addition, and the high fibre content.

It is good if the differences between the reference bread and added bread (bread obtained from flour mixtures with rosehip powder addition) are pretty low. It means that the rosehip powder addition was beneficial for the breadmaking process.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

The manuscript has been modified and properly improved. No other modifications seem necessary at this point.