(NOODLE) Sung & Stone (2004) - Characterization of Legume Starches and Their Noodle Quality
(NOODLE) Sung & Stone (2004) - Characterization of Legume Starches and Their Noodle Quality
(NOODLE) Sung & Stone (2004) - Characterization of Legume Starches and Their Noodle Quality
25-32 (2004)
25
Key words: starch noodle, mung bean, chick pea, pinto bean.
ABSTRACT
Physicochemical properties of starches isolated from Colorado
grown legumes (chick peas, peanut beans, and pinto beans) were
studied to find a feasible, less expensive source for making starch
noodles. Surfactants, monoglycerides of fatty acids and sodium
stearoyl lactylate at 0.5% of starch weight, were also combined with
raw starch to prepare starch noodles. Cooking qualities of pinto bean
and peanut bean starches were inferior to those of mung bean and/or
chick pea starch noodles. Although mung bean starch is used commercially for making starch noodles, functional characteristics and
sensory results on chick pea starch noodles show that chick peas are
suitable sources for starch noodle manufacturing. Addition of surfactants did not improve cooking qualities of starch noodles. Mung bean
starches showed the type C pattern starch and no pasting peak in its
viscoamylogram. Starches of mung bean noodle do not leach into
cooking water before they gelatinize to form a gel network-like
structure.
INTRODUCTION
Oriental starch noodles are composed of starch
and water. It is generally believed that the ideal raw
material for starch noodles is mung bean starch [4]. Lii
et al. [6] suggested that an ideal starch for starch noodle
manufacturing should have high amylose content with a
high iodine affinity value (6 to 7%), restricted swelling,
and a C-type Brabender viscosity pattern.
Lii and Chang [7] reported that starch noodles
prepared from red bean starches were fairly high in
quality, but red bean starches were not as good as mung
bean starches for starch noodle manufacturing. Red
bean starches had restricted swelling and a C-type
Brabender viscoamylograms, but the iodine affinity
(4.83%) from red beans was not as high as that of mung
Paper Submitted 10/07/03, Accepted 12/15/03. Author for Correspondence:
Wen-Chieh Sung. E-mail: sungwill@mail.chna.edu.tw.
*Assistant Professor, Department of Hotel and Restaurant Management,
Chia Nan University of Pharmacy and Science, Tainan, Taiwan 717, R.O.C.
**Professor, Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition, Colorado
State University, Fort Collins, CO, U.S.A.
26
The percentage of iodine affinity of various legume starches was determined according to the proce-
W.C. Sung & M. Stone: Characterization of Legume Starches and Their Noodle Quality
50% mung bean starch and 50% chick pea starch, 100%
chick pea starch) were evaluated by 30 consumers.
Starch noodle preparation followed the method of Chen
[4] for making mung bean starch noodles with some
modifications. Starch noodle samples and commercial
mung bean starch noodles used as reference samples
were cooked for 30 minutes. Thirty male and female
students between the ages of 18 and 30 who were
enrolled in a sensory evaluation course evaluated the
samples.
Panelists were instructed to evaluate how much
they liked appearance, texture, and overall acceptability
of starch noodles on a hedonic scale. The same group of
panelists also ranked four starch noodle samples for
degree of liking of appearance, texture, and overall
acceptability.
Statistical Analysis
A randomized complete block design was used
with four types of legume starches representing treatment levels in three replications per treatment. Data
were analyzed by analysis of variance programs using
Statistical Analysis System [14]. Pearson correlation
coefficients were used to determine the relationship
between factors (solubility, swelling power, water binding capacity, iodine affinity, firmness, cooked weight,
and solid loss of cooked samples). Hedonic scores
obtained from sensory evaluation were statistically
evaluated by analysis of variance with the Statistical
Analysis System [14]. Rank totals required for significance at the 5% level (p<0.05) were obtained from
Appendix: Table I-1 in Principles of Sensory Evaluation of Food [2]. Least squares means were used to
identify differences between treatments at a 5% significance level.
27
28
Starch sample
Mung bean
Chick pea
Peanut bean
Pinto bean
a
b
Yield
Moisture
Crude fat
Ash
0.1a
0.3a
0.3a
0.3a
0.1a
0.2a
0.2a
0.1a
25.3
13.8
9.6
9.7a
6.0b
5.1c
5.6c
0.8a
0.8a
1.1a
1.0a
Starch
Mung bean
Chick pea
Peanut bean
Pinto bean
a
Crude protein
%
Starch
233.7a
487.4b
629.6b
560.3b
60
70
80
90
5.0b
2.5a
5.0b
2.9a
1.1a
1.2a
7.2c
5.9b
C
Mung bean
Chick pea
Peanut bean
Pinto bean
a
0.3a
2.7a
3.0a
0.9a
0.7a
4.8c
2.8b
1.1a
W.C. Sung & M. Stone: Characterization of Legume Starches and Their Noodle Quality
29
Swelling power at
Starch
60
70
80
90
6.8b
8.7c
5.6ab
4.5a
10.4b
9.8b
6.3a
6.9a
C
Mung bean
Chick pea
Peanut bean
Pinto bean
a
2.2a
2.9b
3.5c
2.3a
2.8a
5.9c
5.2b
2.7a
% Iodine affinity
Mung bean
2.3a
Chick pea
4.9b
Peanut bean
6.3b
Pinto bean
5.6b
Granule shape
Irregular (oval/
round bean-shaped)
Irregular (oval/
round bean-shaped)
Irregular (oval/
round bean-shaped)
Irregular (oval/
round bean-shaped)
9.7-24.5
8.1-22.7
8.1-28.5
4.6-19.7
12.2-34.1
12.0-21.7
11.4-35.5
11.0-28.4
17.7a
13.6d
17.0a
12.7d
22.0b
16.0e
24.8c
19.6f
30
Table 6. Strengtha of various dry starch noodles and functional characteristics of 30 minutes cookingb starch noodles
Starch noodle
Mung bean starch
Chick pea starch
Pinto bean starch
Mung bean starch + MG
Mung bean starch + SSL
Strength (g)
% Cooked weight
% Cooking loss
Firmness (g/mm)
1909.4a
1499.2a
784.2b
1983.4a
1674.3a
645.7ab
618.0a
596.8a
695.0b
702.6b
1.3a
1.6a
5.4b
2.4a
3.1a
43.9ab
65.4a
62.1a
50.0ab
37.4b
W.C. Sung & M. Stone: Characterization of Legume Starches and Their Noodle Quality
31
Characteristics
Sample
Appearance
Texture
4.6a
4.0a
3.7a
3.3a
Overall acceptability
4.5a
4.4a
4.1a
4.0a
4.5a
4.7a
4.2a
3.9a
Mean values (27 panelists) with the same grouping letter are not significantly different.
Scale: 1 = Like extremely; 2 = Like very much; 3 = Like slightly; 4 = Neither like nor dislike; 5 = Dislike slightly; 6 = Dislike
very much; 7 = Dislike extremely.
Table 8. Total scorea for rankingb test for legume starch noodles
Sample
Commercial mung bean starch noodles
100% mung bean starch noodles
50% mung bean starch, 50% chick pea starch noodles
100% chick pea starch noodles
Characteristicsc
Appearance
63
56
50
41
Texture
Overall acceptability
70
43
42
55
72
40
48
49
Total scores < 41: like significant better; total scores > 64 liked significant less.
Based on: 1 = like best; 4 = like least.
c
Twenty-one panelists for evaluation.
b
32
10. Medcalf, D.G. and Gilles, K., Wheat Starches. I. Comparison of Physciochemical Properties, Cereal Chem.,
Vol. 42, pp. 558-567 (1965).
11. Mestres, C., Colonna, P., and Buleon, A., Characteristics of Starch Networks within Rice Flour Noodles and
Mung Bean Starch Vermicelli, J. Food Sci., Vol. 53, pp.
1809-1812 (1988).
12. Mohri, Z., Interaction between Starch and Fatty Acid
Esters in Frozen Starch Noodles, Agric. Biol. Chem.,
Vol. 44, pp. 1455-1459 (1980).
13. Naivikul, O. and DAppolonia, B.L., Characteristics
of Legume Flours Compared with Wheat Flour. II.
Starch, Cereal Chem., Vol. 56, pp. 24-28 (1979).
14. SAS Institute, Inc., SAS Users Guide, Statistics, Version 6 Edition, SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina
(1995).
15. Schoch, T.J., Iodimetric Determination of Amylose,
Methods in Carbohydrate Chemistry. Vol. 4, Whistler,
R.L. (Ed.), Academic Press, New York and London, pp.
157-160 (1964).
16. Singh, U., Voraputhaporn, W., Rao, P.V., and
Jambunathan, R., Physicochemical Characteristics of
Pigeonpea and Mung Bean Starches and Their Noodle
Quality, J. Food Sci., Vol. 54, pp. 1293-1297 (1989).
17. Xu, A. and Seib, P.A., Structure of Tapioca Pearls
Compared to Starch Noodles from Mung Beans, J.
Food Sci., Vol. 70, pp. 463-470 (1993).