Abstract
The aroma profiles of bread crusts made from intermediate wheatgrass (Thinopyrum intermedium) and whole wheat (Triticum aestivum) flours were compared. Based on gas chromatography/mass spectrometry/olfactometry analysis, twenty-four odorants were identified and further quantified. The concentrations of seventeen compounds were significantly different between intermediate wheatgrass and whole wheat bread crusts, of which sixteen compounds were higher in the whole wheat sample. The aroma profiles of the bread samples were subsequently characterized using sensory descriptive analysis (DA) and indicated that the roasted attribute was perceived at a significantly higher intensity in the whole wheat sample due to a greater amount of Maillard reaction compounds. Alternatively, bran and green notes were perceived at higher intensities in the intermediate wheatgrass sample, however they were not attributed to the presence of specific compounds but rather to a change in the aroma composition. Aroma recombination DA of the whole wheat and intermediate wheatgrass aroma models was similar to the original aroma profiles of the bread samples, demonstrating the sensory relevance of the identified odorants.
Highlights
Common wheat (Triticum aestivum) is among the world’s most traded commodities and is projected to increase in trade by almost 16% over the ten years to reach 212 million metric tons by 2027/2028 [1]
Aroma profiles of bread crusts formulated with either whole wheat or Intermediate wheatgrass (IWG) flour were characterized using GC/MS/O analysis. Both crusts showed similar volatile profiles and were composed of aroma compounds previously reported in wheat bread such as ketones, alcohols, esters and heterocycle compounds (Table 1)
Nine of the compounds previously reported as Maillard reaction products were identified, including pyrazines and α-acetyl-N-heterocycles (Table 1). 2-Acetylfuran, 2-ethyl-3,5-dimethylpyrazine and 2-ethyl-3,6-dimethylpyrazine, associated with yeasty, roasted and chocolate notes, respectively, showed the highest fold-change with concentrations approximately 20-fold higher in the whole wheat bread compared to the IWG sample
Summary
Common wheat (Triticum aestivum) is among the world’s most traded commodities and is projected to increase in trade by almost 16% over the ten years to reach 212 million metric tons by 2027/2028 [1]. Intermediate wheatgrass (IWG, Thinopyrum intermedium) has been identified as one of the most promising candidates as a wheat alternative due to its perennial growth trait which is beneficial for sustainable agricultural practices [2]. It presents a rich nutritional profile and is high in dietary fiber [3]. Little is known regarding the flavor performance of IWG when incorporated in foodstuffs. The impact of IWG on flavor in comparison to common wheat is not adequately understood. An improved understanding of how IWG impacts the flavor attributes of food products is needed
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
