lable at ScienceDirect

Journal of Food Engineering 172 (2016) 25e30

Contents lists avai

Journal of Food Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/ j foodeng

Pasting characteristics of wheat-chia blends

I. �Svec*, M. Hru�skov�a, I. Jurinov�aDepartment of Carbohydrates and Cereals, University of Chemical Technology Prague, Technick�a 5, 166 28 Praha 6 e Dejvice, Czech Republic

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 6 October 2014Received in revised form27 April 2015Accepted 29 April 2015Available online 9 May 2015

Keywords:Wheat composite flour chiaPastingBread volumeDietary fibre

* Corresponding author.E-mail address: Ivan.Svec@vscht.cz (I. �Svec).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2015.04.0300260-8774/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

a b s t r a c t

White or black chia seeds, substituting 2.5% or 5.0% of wheat flour in prepared blends, were treated bymilling, hydration, or combination of both. In terms of ash and protein contents, chia addition influencedchemical composition in higher extent than its type e increases up to about 0.5% and 1.3%, respectively,were evaluated. Protein quality was diminished to 35% in maximum, within any impact of chia type. Ahigher chia addition raised total dietary fibre content almost about one half (from 3.21% to 4.58%). Whitechia caused gradual lowering of amylases activity, while its dark type had insignificant effect. Compositebread volumes overcame the control one about 6e30%; positive chia effect has risen in order of formswhole hydrated (þ9% in average), hydrated milled chia (þ20%) and milled dry chia (þ29%). As presumed,crumb firmness corresponded to bread volumes (r ¼ 0.83, P ¼ 99.9%), demonstrating ease of crumbmastication.

© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Chia seeds originate from Spanish variant of sage (Salvia his-panica L.), annual plant of Labiatae family, bred mainly in SouthAmerican countries. White or black coloured, they are of ellipticshape and tiny size (around 1 mm). Name “chia” is a derivation ofAztec word “chian” meaning oily (Ayerza and Coates, 2005). Theword “chia” is incorporated in name of the present Mexican stateChiapas, in which chia production reaches the highest volume.Similarly to nowadays, chia seeds were eaten already in Aztecepoch alone or blended with cereals, in whole or milled into flour.Mixed with water, thick gel is formed after five minutes only. Ac-cording to their hydrophilic character, amount of absorbed watercomes up to volume magnifying 12 times (Moroni et al., 2010;Talandov�a et al., 2013). Chia seeds were recognised as valuablefood raw-material, containing 91e96 g/100 g dry matter, 4e6 g/100 g ash, 20e22 g/100 g proteins, 25e41 g/100 g saccharides,30e35 g/100 g fat, 18e30 g/100 g dietary fibre (crude fibre;Direction 2013/50/EU). In chia seeds, non-saturated fatty acids(C18:2 and C18:3) are presented, and further easy digestible pro-teins, soluble fibre and minerals (calcium, iron, zinc, phosphor,magnesium) (Reyes-Caudillo et al., 2008; Ayerza and Coates, 2011;Ciftci et al., 2012; Pizzaro et al., 2013). Non-starch polysaccharidesare also represented by fructo-oligosaccharides (2e3%; Pszczola,

2012). Both forms (black and white) exhibit a high antioxidantactivity due to the presence of phenolic compounds and tocoph-erols (Capitani et al., 2012). Usage of chia seed as novel foodingredient was authorised by Directive 2009/827/EC. Consideringbakery product, addition level was allowed up to 5% (Regulation258/97/EC, valid to year 2012). Recently the limit was increasedto 10% (Direction 2013/50/EU).

Chia products are tasteless and owing to this they do not affect atraditional sensorial profile of bread. Because they are not hardwhen bitten, milling is not necessary compared to other such seeds.Bakery products involving chia are characterised by higher nutri-tional value and significantly prolonged shelf-live (Peiretti and Gai,2009; Mohd et al., 2012; Segura-Campos et al., 2013).

Wheat flour fortification by different chia forms is reflected inquality parameters change of composite flour, depending on usedlevel. Characteristics of chia-enriched dough are solved in papers ofe.g. Ixtaina et al. (2008), Capitani et al. (2012) or Iglesias-Puig andHaros (2013). Inglett et al. (2013) describe behaviour of blendcomposed from barley and chia flour and state that addition up to10% had no verifiable effect on both dough viscosity and elasticity.

Chia addition into wheat flour causes gluten proteins dilution aswell as bread volume decrease. Ortega-Ramirez et al. (2013)determined a diminishing up to 25% against non-fortified control,using 5% or 10% chia into recipe. Similar negative effect observedFarrera-Rebollo et al. (2012) e volume of sweet bread containing12% of chia flour attained approx. 88% of the control.

The aim of the study was to compare proximate chemical

I. �Svec et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 172 (2016) 25e3026

composition and pasting properties of wheat-chia composite flourin terms of determination of the Solvent Retention Capacity profileand the amylograph proof. Influence of two chia botanical types ofwhite and black coloured seeds was compared, testing threedifferent forms of chia (milled dry, whole hydrated, milled hy-drated). A baking value of wheat-chia blends was also evaluated,focusing on comparison of both chia samples as well as the appliedforms.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Flour samples, blends preparation

Basic wheat flour was rendered by the commercial mill DeltaPrague, and its quality corresponds with both level of the Czechfood wheat (protein content 10.73%, Zeleny value 41 ml). Accordingto thementioned quality parameters, it is also suitable for its partialreplacement by non-gluten rawmaterial. Chia seed samples (whiteCH1, black CH2) originated in Mexico, and were bought in speci-alised food shops in Prague. To disintegrate the seeds, laboratorygrinder Concept KM 5001 was used (type of blade grinder, seedsdosage ca 50 g, treatment time 1 min). In accordance to RegulationEC 258/97 limiting chia usage in bakery products up to 5.0%, onlytwo dosages 2.5% and 5.0% were used in case of the SolventRetention Capacity, the dietary fibre content (testing milled dryform), and the amylograph as well as laboratory baking test (testingall three mentioned chia forms). Whole seeds or wholemeal hy-drationwas performed by stirring of 7.5 g or 15.0 g chia in 150 ml ofdistilled water of ambient temperature left in laboratory beaker for10 min, and remixed immediately before usage.

2.2. Analytical quality of blends

Chemical composition of bi-composite flour was determined interms of ash and proteins contents, following the �CSN 560512-8and the �CSN ISO 1871 methods; further, bakery quality of proteinsand amylose activity in wheat-chia blends were estimated as theZeleny sedimentation value and the Falling Number (�CSN ISO 5529and 3039, respectively; measurements in duplicate). The FallingNumber could be considered as primary (screening) method forestimation of water suspension viscosity of material tested, as wellas amylases activity participating on wheat polysaccharides prop-erties when heated in water. Conducting the Solvent RetentionCapacity profile (AACC method 56-11, abbreviation SRC), overallchia influence on blends chemical composition was evaluated. Thewater, the sucrose, the sodium carbonate and the lactic acid SRChave a relation to overall absorption ability of all network-formingflour constituents, level of damaged starch, pentosan and gliadincharacteristics as well as to glutenin characteristics, respectively,contributing to viscous behaviour. For pasting characteristics ofwheat-chia blend, more information can be obtained from sucroseSRC. For the SRC foursome, repeatability as standard deviations0.287, 0.811, 0.672 and 0.871 were determined in advance. By usingMegazyme assay kit, dietary fibre percentage was screened as totalcontent and its soluble and insoluble fractions rate (AOAC method985.29, single measurement). For the cited analytical procedures,chia was used in a milled dry form.

2.3. Rheological behaviour of blends

Influence of milled dry, whole hydrated and milled hydratedform of the non-traditional plant material was compared duringrheological and baking trials. Pasting properties of wheat controland prepared flour composites were measured with the help of theAmylograph (Brabender GmbH., Duisburg, Germany) in a

correspondence with ICC procedure No. 126/1 (single measure-ment, standard deviation 4.2% for the amylograph viscositymaximum). The method is internationally approved, and especiallyin bakery branch, it testifies about potential usage of wheat flour orflour composite, especially to describe the pasting characteristics.Using an office scanner, original paper record of amylograph curveof the wheat control was grabbed. To illustrate influences of chiatype and chia form on suspension viscosity development, amylo-grams of wheat blends with 5% of chia were transformed intomultiline plot (ca 50 viscosity points, read in each whole minute)combiningwheat flour and the relevant triple of the CH1 or the CH2group.

2.4. Laboratory baking test

Laboratory baking test was performed following the internalmethod of the UCT Prague (Hru�skov�a et al., 2006). Briefly, full-formula dough was prepared with the help of the Farinograph(Brabender GmbH., Duisburg, Germany) adding distilled water of30 �C to consistency 600 ± 20 Brabender units. Fermented atstandard conditions, 70 g dough pieces were manually formed andleft to leaven, and baked on a baking sheet. Baking procedure takes14 min in a laboratory apparatus preheated to 240 �C with steam-ing at the beginning, using 50 ml of distilled water. After 2 h of bunscooling at ambient temperature, bread specific volume was evalu-ated by rapeseed displacement method in triplicate. Buns weresplit manually to halves by serrated knife and five cylindrical crumbsamples were cut out (35 mm in height, 30 mm in diameter) forcrumb firmness determination. By using the Penetrometer PNR-10(Petrotest GmbH., Germany) with semisphere probe 25 mm indiameter fixed in screw holder (total weight 150 g), crumb sampleswere compressed and penetration depth was recorded afterdeformation taking 5 s.

Factors influence of chia type, chia form and addition level wasexplored by analysis of variance (ANOVA) using Statistica 7.1 soft-ware (Statsoft Inc., Tulsa, USA). When the F value was significant(p < 0.05), means were separated using the honest significant dif-ference test (Tukey’s HSD test).

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Analytical quality of blends

Changes in chemical composition of tested blends were clearlyattributed to chia addition level than to chia type factor (Table 1;agreement with Ayerza, 2013). The values of ash and protein con-tents have been increased owing to gradually higher chia rate inblends e an increment was evaluated as 15% and 2% absolutely,respectively. Coelho and Salas-Mellado (2014) confirmed bothcharacteristics rise by analysis of bread involving 7.8% of hydratedchia flour and 11.0% of hydrated chia seeds. Compared to wheatcontrol, protein baking quality (Zeleny test) has been reverselydiminished about ca 20% and 24% for blends with 2.5% and 5.0% ofchia, respectively (Table 1). Due to higher measurement error(25 s), amylose activity estimated as the Falling Number differedbetween control and samples with 5% chia flour only.

As Ayerza and Coates (2005) confirm, chia contains multiplyhigher protein and dietary fibre content compared to wheat; thatfact was significantly reflected in variation of the control SRC pro-file. Overall absorption capacity (water SRC) increased approx.about 10% and 33% in cases of 2.5% and 5.0% chia additions,respectively (Fig. 1). The same tendency was registered for sodiumcarbonate SRC, so both introduced chia proteins and pentosanshave demonstrated their hydrophilic nature. In relation to controlbread, the positive influence of chia was further reflected in specific

Table 1Influence of chia type and addition level on chemical composition of wheat-chia blends (milled dry form).

Chia addition (g/100 g) Ash (g/100 g) Proteins (f ¼ 5.7, g/100 g)

Chia type CH1 CH2 Factor addition level CH1 CH2 Factor addition level

0.0 (WF) 0.52 0.52a Oct-73 10.73a2.5 0.59 0.59 0.59b 11.00 11.00 11.00b5.0 0.69 0.69 0.69c 11.21 11.21 11.21cFactor Chia type 0.64A 0.64A 11.09A 11.10A

Chia addition (%) Zeleny value (ml) Falling Number (s)

Chia type CH1 CH2 Factor addition level CH1 CH2 Factor addition level

0.0 (WF) 41 41c 327 327a2.5 33 33 33b 347 348 348b5.0 31 31 31a 377 377 377cFactor Chia type 32A 32A 362A 363A

WF e wheat flour, CH1, CH2 e wholemeal chia flour from white and brown seeds, respectively.aec e line averages signed by the same letter are not statistically different, P ¼ 95%.A e column averages signed by the same letter are not statistically different, P ¼ 95%.

I. �Svec et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 172 (2016) 25e30 27

bread volume increase. This finding is supported by V�azquez-Ovando et al. (2009), who determined water holding capacity(WHC) of fibrous fraction of chia. They stated the WHC of thefraction is of 15.4 times of its weight (compared toWHC 6.1 and 2.5for wheat bran and hulls, respectively). Moreover, Segura-Camposet al. (2014) confirm that polysaccharides making gum extractedfrom whole chia nutlets are able to absorb water in multipleamount of its weight. For the water, sucrose and sodium carbonateSRC, stronger impact of addition level than chia type could beobserved. Gluten weakening described by the lactic acid SRC wasattributed mainly to applied chia type e CH1 diminished thefeature about 11%, while the CH2 flour demonstrated significantlylower impact (decrease approx. 4%).

3.2. Rheological behaviour of blends

During the amylograph test, gelatinisation of water-compositesuspensions started clearly earlier than the wheat control one e

observed temperatures lie between 50.5 �C and 56.5 �C (comparedto 61.0 �C; data not shown). Amylograph maximum of the controlsample (240 amylograph units, Fig. 2) informs about acceptableamylolytic activity and possibility of standard usage of such wheatflour in bakery process. Contrasted to the control, addition of bothstudied chia types thickened flour water suspension significantly,comparably to results of Inglett et al. (2013, 2014) (combination ofchia wholemeal with barley or oat flour, respectively). Viscousbehaviour of composite flour containing CH1 was noticeablyaffected by chia treatment (form factor) e hydration before the testpositively interacted with seed disintegration and resulted intosignificant viscosity increase, regardless to addition level. In case of5% of CH1 in blend, courses of amylograph curves were relativelyclose together (Fig. 3a). Maxima were recorded between 41.0 and43.0 min of the test, and viscosity of the composite flours wasincreased against wheat control about 8%, 21% and 42% (milled dry,whole hydrated and milled hydrated form, respectively). Wheatflour enhancement by CH2 did not lead to viscosity change in suchextent, and amylograph test was able to differentiate tested chiaspecies one from each other. For samples with 5% of CH2, seedtreatments listed above showed a reversal trend than within CH1group. Composite with milled dry black chia demonstrated thehighest viscosity, followed by a soft decrease for further two usedforms (135%, 125% and 117% of viscosity of the control sample,respectively). A significant difference could be probably consideredbetween blends with milled dry and milled hydrated CH2 form,both in time of viscosity peaks occurrence and the values recorded(Fig. 3b). According to insignificant change in the Falling Number,

different amylograh characteristics of wheat-white chia andwheat-black chia blends had no or a weak relation to amylases activity.Owing to this, distinctive courses of the amylograph curves wereprobably affected by specific type and form of chia tested, i.e. bydifferent behaviour of polysaccharide component within temper-ature interval 25e95 �C. In Fig. 3c, described variance is summar-ised and diverse impact of tested chia types could be compareddirectly.

3.3. Baking test results

All observed chia addition effects are reflected in baking testtrial, during which changes in both physicochemical and mechan-ical properties are proved in natura. Control bread volume reached270 ml/100 g, and that value is common for bread prepared fromwheat flour of the Czech origin used as a base for non-traditionalplant material addition (e.g. sample ‘Flour 2007’ e specific vol-ume 252 ml/100 g; �Svec and Hru�skov�a, 2010). Volumes of bakeryproduct containing CH1 or CH2 were evaluated in comparableranges (294e353 ml/100 g and 287e349 ml/100 g, respectively;Fig. 4). Generally, chia product addition clearly contributed tohigher bun sizes in a positive meaning, what is a contrary trend tothe results published by Iglesias-Puig and Haros (2013) andSteffolani et al. (2015). Rise of wheat-chia buns size was attributedto increased protein and pentosan contents, determined as higherwater and sodium carbonate SRC. Influence of chia type wasinsignificant, although there could be noticed a weaker increase ofbread volumes by higher dosage of CH1. Similar improvable effectcould be attributed to chia addition level because of median values324 and 315 ml/100 g for 2.5% and 5.0% of chia in recipe, respec-tively. In Fig. 4, there is a demonstration of only verifiable effect ofchia seed treatment e bread volumes enlargement reached ca 30%in maximum. Determined specific volume of the bread sampleswith whole hydrated chia seeds was comparable to wheat controlvalue, i.e. lower than size of buns containing chia flour (Iglesias-Puig and Haros, 2013; Steffolani et al., 2015). Perhaps homogeni-zation of chia gel macro-particles into wheat flour does not reachedso precise extent as one of chia wholemeal and, as Steffolani et al.(2015) concluded, chia seed may cause earlier gases escape dur-ing a fermentation process. The latter form as non-hydrated ma-terial supported the specific bread volume rise in the mentionedextent. Somewhat more levelled specific volume in bread pairswith 2.5% or 5.0% of CH2 could be explained by softer decrease inthe lactic acid SRC with insignificant effect on the suspension vis-cosity (amylograph maximum) as discussed above.

Better consumer’s quality of bread containing milled chia was

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Fig. 1. Influence of milled dry white CH1 and black CH2 chia seeds on wheat flourSolvent Retention Capacity profile (SRC).

Fig. 2. Amylograph curve of wheat flour (control).

I. �Svec et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 172 (2016) 25e3028

confirmed by higher crumb penetration rate (i.e. lower crumbfirmness), increased approx. twice from 12.2 mm (control) up to22.1 mm (bread containing 5% of milled dry CH2; data not shown).Measured values corresponded well with specific bread volumeevaluated (Pearson r ¼ 0.83, P ¼ 99.9%; Fig. 5). In terms of effectsstudied, similar trend as for the specific bread volume was noticed.Intervals of crumb penetration of samples with CH1 or CH2 werealike together (13.4e20.9 mm and 11.3e22.1 mm, respectively),and according to medians (16.2 and 17.9 mm), neither recipes with2.5% or 5.0% of chia products, respectively, could not be differen-tiated. Pooled over chia type, closeness of penetration values forbread with dry or hydrated chia could be noticed (19.5 and17.2 mm, respectively), which were significantly higher than one

for bread containing whole hydrated seeds (13.2 mm).Different impact of chia wholemeal and whole seeds on bread

volume confirms data published by Coelho and Salas-Mellado

Fig. 3. Influence of chia type (CH1 e white seeds, CH2 e black seeds), chia seedtreatment and addition level on amylograph test results. (a, b) amylogram courses ofwheat flour and composites containing 5% CH1 and CH2, respectively, (c) viscositymaxima of wheat flour and 12 wheat-chia flour composites.

Fig. 4. Changes in specific bread volume (SBV) caused by chia type (CH1 e white, CH2brown), chia seeds treatment and chia addition level. Control bread SBV reached270 ml/100 g.

I. �Svec et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 172 (2016) 25e30 29

(2014). In agreement with our findings, volume of bread containing7.8% of chia flour was similar or greater than to the control, whilebread volumewith 11% of seeds in recipe reached statistically lowervalue (3.2, 3.1 and 2.9 cm3/ml, respectively). Crumb firmnessdetermined 1 h after baking by using the TA-XT2 texturometer wasprovably different between all three recipes tested (36.2, 56.9 and48.9 g, respectively). Reversely to our results, crumb includingwhole chia seeds was softer in contrast to one with chia flour.

Fig. 5. Influence of chia type (CH1 e white seeds, CH2 e black seeds), seed treatment(white, grey and black dots for milled dry, whole hydrated and milled hydrated chiaforms, respectively) and addition level (2.5%, 5.0%) on bread characteristics. CH1e2.5:wheat-chia flour blend containing 2.5% of CH1.

3.4. Nutritional benefit of chia addition

In correspondence with other authors (e.g. Ayerza, 2013), di-etary fibre content in chia seeds is multiply higher (30.23%, 30.62%in CH1 and CH2, respectively) compared to wheat flour (3.21%).

Owing to this fact, 5.0% of the seeds in bread recipe means a pos-itive nutritional contribution in comparison to wheat bread. Coelhoand Salas-Mellado (2014) found statistically higher dietary fibrecontent in both bread containing 7.8% of chia flour or 11% of chiaseeds (0.3%, 2.0% and 3.9%, respectively). Between tested chia types,no statistically verifiable difference was determined; as for otheranalytical characteristics, the main impact was attributed to non-traditional material ratio in bi-composite blend (Table 2). Compa-rable change of the broader extent was observed for insoluble andtotal dietary fibre, which values have risen up to about 46%.

4. Conclusions

Addition of white (CH1) or black (CH2) chia seeds, added intowheat flour in a milled dry, whole hydrated or milled hydratedform, caused similar variation in chemical composition in terms ofash or protein contents increase and protein technological qualitydiminishing. Determined SRC profiles of wheat flour-chia com-posites confirmed an introduction of non-starch polysaccharides aswell as higher rate of starch damage, resulting into higher waterabsorption ability. In the lactic acid SRC values, softer negativeimpact of 2.5% and 5.0% of milled dry CH2 was revealed. Course of

Table 2Influence of chia type and addition level on dietary fibre (DF) content wheat-chia blends (milled dry form).

Chia addition (g/100 g) Insoluble DF (g/100 g) Soluble DF (g/100 g) Total DF (g/100 g)

Chia type CH1 CH2 Factor addition level CH1 CH2 Factor addition level CH1 CH2 Factor addition level

0.0 (WF) 2.08 2.08a 1.20 n.e. 3.21 3.21a2.5 2.57 2.58 2.58b 1.20 1.20 n.e. 3.88 3.89 3.88b5.0 3.08 3.13 3.11c 1.40 1.40 n.e. 4.56 4.58 4.57cFactor Chia type 2.83A 2.86A n.e. n.e. 4.22A 4.24A

WF e wheat flour, CH1, CH2 e wholemeal chia flour from white and brown seeds, respectively.aee e line averages signed by the same letter are not statistically different, P ¼ 95%.A e column averages signed by the same letter are not statistically different, P ¼ 95%.n.e. e not evaluable (zero deviation).

I. �Svec et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 172 (2016) 25e3030

the amylograph tests confirmed a gradual lowering of amylasesactivity by addition of CH1 in order of the listed forms (from 8% upto 42%). Treatment of the CH2 seeds brought only aweak significanteffect (amylograph maxima recorded in range 280e330 amylo-graph units). Bread volume was positively influenced by chiawholemeal in bread recipe, reflecting observed changes in chemicalcomposition and rheological properties. Higher bun sizes weredetermined for blends withmilled chia of both types, especially in adry form; they overcame wheat bread standard about ca 30% (risefrom 270 to 350 ml/100 g). Such bread had also better consumer’squality, represented by lower crumb firmness (crumb penetrationrise from 12.2 mm up to 20.9 mm). Chia addition into bread recipemeant also a nutritional contribution in terms of increase of ash anddietary fibre content.

Acknowledgment

This study was solved under Grant No. QI111 B053 ‘New Food’,the NAZV, Czech Republic.

References

2009/827/ES. <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri¼OJ:L:2009:294:0014:0015:CS:PDF> (download 20.10.14).

2013/50/EU. <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri¼OJ:L:2013:021:0034:0035:CS:PDF> (download 20.10.14).

Ayerza, R., 2013. Seed composition of two chia (Salvia hispanica L.) genotypes whichdiffer in seed color. Emirates J. Food Agric. 25, 495e500.

Ayerza, R., Coates, W., 2005. CHIA, first ed.. Rediscovering a Forgotten Crop of theAztecs. University of Arizona Press, Tuscon, USA, p. 197.

Ayerza, R., Coates, W., 2011. Protein content, oil content and fatty acid profiles aspotential criteria to determine the origin of commercially grown chia (Salviahispanica L.). Ind. Crops Prod. 34, 1366e1371.

Capitani, M.I., Spotorno, V., Nolasco, S.M., Tom�as, M.C., 2012. Physicochemical andfunctional characterization of by-products from chia (Salvia hispanica L.) seedsof Argentina. LWT e Food Sci. Technol. 45, 94e102.

Ciftci, O.N., Przybylski, R., Rudzinska, M., 2012. Lipid components of flax, perilla, andchia seeds. Eur. J. Lipid Sci. Technol. 114, 794e800.

Coelho, M.S., Salas-Mellado, M.M., 2014. Effects of substituting chia (Salvia hispanicaL.) flour or seeds for wheat flour on the quality of the bread. LWT e Food Sci.Technol. 60, 729e736.

EC 258/97. <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/CS/TXT/PDF/?uri¼CELEX:31997R0258&from¼EN> (download 20.10.14).

Farrera-Rebollo, R.R., Salgado-Gruz, M., Chanona-Perez, J., Gutierr�ez-Lopez, G.F.,Alamilla-Beltran, L., Calderon-Dominguez, G., 2012. Evaluation of image anal-ysis tools for characterization of sweet bread crumb structure. Food Bioprocess

Technol. 5, 474e484.Hru�skov�a, M., �Svec, I., Jirsa, O., 2006. Correlation between milling and baking pa-

rameters of wheat varieties. J. Food Eng. 77 (3), 439e444.Iglesias-Puig, E., Haros, M., 2013. Evaluation of performance of dough and bread

incorporating chia (Salvia hispanica L.). Eur. Food Res. Technol. 237, 865e874.Inglett, G.E., Chen, D., Xu, J., Lee, S., 2013. Pasting and rheological properties of chia

composites containing barley flour. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 48, 2564e2570.Inglett, G.E., Chen, D., Liu, S.X., Lee, S., 2014. Pasting and rheological properties of oat

products dry-blended with ground chia seeds. LWT e Food Sci. Technol. 55,148e156.

Ixtaina, V.Y., Nolasco, S.M., Tom�as, M.C., 2008. Physicochemical characterization ofchia (Salvia hispanica) seed oil from Yucat�an, M�exico. Ind. Crops Prod. 28,220e226.

Mohd, A.N., Yeap, S.K., Ho, W.Y., Beh, B.K., Tan, S.W., Tan, S.G., 2012. The promisingfuture of chia, Salvia hispanica L. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/171956. ID 171956 (download 20.02.14).

Moroni, A.V., Iametti, S., Bonomi, F., Arendt, E.K., Dal Bello, F., 2010. Solubility ofproteins from non-gluten cereals: a comparative study on combinations ofsolubilising agents. Food Chem. 121, 1225e1230.

Ortega-Ramirez, R., Leyva-García, D.I., Sanchez-Robles, R.M., Morales-Ortega, A.,2013. Effect of addition of amaranth, chia and wheat bran on bread: Impact onantioxidant activity. In: Book of Abstracts of C&E Spring Meeting: Unlocking theFull Potential of Cereals: Challenge for Science Based Innovation, Leuven,Belgium.

Peiretti, P.G., Gai, F., 2009. Fatty acid and nutritive quality of chia (Salvia hispanica L.)seeds and plant during growth. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 148, 267e275.

Pizzaro, P., Lopes Almeida, E., Samm�an, N.C., Chang, Y.K., 2013. Evaluation of wholechia (Salvia hispanica L.) flour and hydrogenated vegetable fat in pound cake.LWT e Food Sci. Technol. 54, 73e79.

Pszczola, D.E., 2012. Seeds of success. Food Technol. 66 (11), 45e55.Reyes-Caudillo, E., Tecante, A., Valdivia-Lopez, M.A., 2008. Dietary fibre content and

antioxidant activity of phenolic compounds present in Mexican chia (Salviahispanica L.) seeds. Food Chem. 107, 656e663.

Segura-Campos, M.R., Salazar-Vega, I.M., Chel-Guerrero, L.A., Betancur-Ancona, D.A.,2013. Biological potential of chia (Salvia hispanica L.) protein hydrolysates andtheir incorporation into functional foods. LWT e Food Sci. Technol. 50, 723e731.

Segura-Campos, M.R., Acosta-Chi, Z., Rosado-Rubio, G., Chel-Guerero, L., Betancur-Ancona, D.A., 2014. Whole and crushed nutlets of chia (Salvia hispanica) fromMexico as a source of functional gums. Food Sci. Technol., Campinas 34 (4),701e709.

Steffolani, E., Martinez, M.M., Le�on, A.E., Gom�ez, M., 2015. Effect of pre-hydration ofchia (Salvia hispanica L.), seeds and flour on the quality of wheat flour breads.LWT e Food Sci. Technol. 61, 401e406.

�Svec, I., Hru�skov�a, M., 2010. Evaluation of wheat bread features. J. Food Eng. 99 (4),505e510.

Talandov�a, M., Pospiech, M., Tremlov�a, B., 2013. Vyu�zití semen chia (Salvia hispanicaL.) a vliv na lidsk�e zdraví. [Chia (Salvia hispanica L.) seeds usage and influenceon human health]. Vý�ziva a potraviny 68, 104e106 (in Czech).

V�azquez-Ovando, A., Rosado-Rubio, G., Chel-Guerrero, L., Betancur-Ancona, D.,2009. Physicochemical properties of a fibrous fraction from chia (Salvia his-panica L.). LWT e Food Sci. Technol. 42 (1), 168e173.