Structure, Physicochemical Properties, and In Vitro Starch Digestibility of Yellow Pea Flour Modified with Different Organic Acids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to produce a pea flour ingredient with higher slowly digestible (SDS) and resistant (RS) starch fractions for functional food applications. Heat‐moisture treated flour (HMTF) in the presence of citric, gallic, or vanillic acids and esterified flour (EF) with citric acid were prepared and analyzed for structure and functionality using in vitro starch digestibility, differential scanning calorimetry, Rapid Visco Analyzer, swelling factor (SF), amylose leaching (AML), optical microscopy, and Fourier transform infrared (FT‐IR) spectroscopy. Significant ( P < 0.05) increases in SDS and RS content of HMTF and EF were observed. Whereas the granule integrity and the birefringence were not affected by modification, the degree of crystalline order, which was determined by FT‐IR 1,047/1,022 cm −1 peak ratio, was decreased. Gelatinization enthalpies of modified flour were lower than that of native flour, whereas the gelatinization endotherms of HMTF were shifted to higher temperatures and those of EF to lower temperatures. Pasting properties were also affected greatly by both treatments. HMTF demonstrated reduced SF and AML, whereas EF had reduced SF and increased AML. Further, the extent of changes in the structure and functionality of HMTF depended on the type of acid utilized. Overall, heat‐moisture treatment with an organic acid and esterification were effective modifications to produce a pea flour ingredient with enhanced SDS and RS content.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".