This article was downloaded by: [Australian National University]

On: 10 January 2015, At: 10:04

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Food Properties

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ljfp20

Influence of Gliadin and Glutenin

Fractions on Rheological, Pasting, and
Textural Properties of Dough
a a a
Sheweta Barak , Deepak Mudgil & B. S. Khatkar
a
Department of Food Technology, Guru Jambheshwar University of
Science and Technology, Hisar, India
Accepted author version posted online: 15 Oct 2013.Published
online: 21 Mar 2014.

Click for updates

To cite this article: Sheweta Barak, Deepak Mudgil & B. S. Khatkar (2014) Influence of Gliadin and
Glutenin Fractions on Rheological, Pasting, and Textural Properties of Dough, International Journal of
Food Properties, 17:7, 1428-1438, DOI: 10.1080/10942912.2012.717154

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10942912.2012.717154

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [Australian National University] at 10:04 10 January 2015
 International Journal of Food Properties, 17:1428–1438, 2014
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1094-2912 print / 1532-2386 online
DOI: 10.1080/10942912.2012.717154

INFLUENCE OF GLIADIN AND GLUTENIN FRACTIONS

ON RHEOLOGICAL, PASTING, AND TEXTURAL
PROPERTIES OF DOUGH

Sheweta Barak, Deepak Mudgil, and B.S. Khatkar

Department of Food Technology, Guru Jambheshwar University of Science and
Downloaded by [Australian National University] at 10:04 10 January 2015

Technology, Hisar, India

The glutenins and gliadins were added to the base flour at varying concentrations of 2, 4, 6, 8,
and 10 g/100 g flour, respectively. The addition of glutenins remarkably improved the mixing
characteristics of the flour, while gliadins resulted in decreased dough stability and increased
softening of the dough. The pasting characteristics varied with the varying concentrations
of gliadins and glutenins. The peak viscosity decreased upon the addition of gliadins and
glutenin, with gliadins being more effective in reducing the values of peak, final, breakdown,
and setback viscosities. The hardness of the dough improved upon the addition of glutenins,
while the gliadins resulted in dough with greater adhesiveness and cohesiveness. The gluten
recovery increased by 98.79% upon addition of 10 g/100 g flour gliadins while the gluten
quality measured in terms of gluten index was increased by the addition of glutenins.

Keywords: Gliadin, Glutenin, Dough rheology, Pasting characteristics, Textural properties.

INTRODUCTION
Wheat is undoubtedly the supereminent cereal crop in the world due to its widespread
distribution and extensive utilization for baked food products.[1] It is consumed as food
and feed in different ways throughout the world.[2] The unusual properties of the wheat
is ascribed to the presence of gluten forming storage proteins of the endosperm which are
further composed of two fractions- the alcohol soluble gliadins and the alcohol insolu-
ble glutenins.[3,4] Gliadins contain intra-molecular disulfide bonds, the breaking of which
causes unfolding of the protein molecule. They are apparently responsible for the cohe-
sive property of gluten.[1,5,6] The glutenin proteins are multi-chained and appear to be
mainly polymerized by disulfide bonds.[7] These proteins appear to give the gluten its elas-
tic properties. Glutenin is predominantly responsible for the elastic properties of dough
and gliadin contributes to dough extensibility.[4,8] The relative proportions of these com-
ponents in gluten affect the dough rheological properties, with higher glutenin content,
imparting greater gluten strength in wheat. Wheat dough is viscoelastic, which means that
it has both viscous and elastic characteristics. Upon hydration, the gliadins behave as a
viscous liquid[9,10] which imparts extensibility to the dough. If dough is too viscous and
flows too much during sheeting, the dough does not maintain the desired final shape. If the

Received 30 May 2012; accepted 27 July 2012.

Address correspondence to B.S. Khatkar, Department of Food Technology, Guru Jambheshwar University
of Science and Technology, Hisar 125001, India. E-mail: bhup2009@hotmail.com

1428
 INFLUENCE OF GLIADIN AND GLUTENIN ON DOUGH PROPERTIES 1429

dough lacks in its elastic properties, it is difficult to form into the desired shape with the
result that the final products are not desired by the customers. Moreover, an inverse rela-
tionship exists between the gliadin/glutenin ratio and the elasticity of gluten. Therefore,
a correct balance of viscoelastic properties is very important to a successful sheeting pro-
cess. Thus, on one hand, it is necessary to control the extensibility of the dough, and on
the other hand it is important to control the elasticity. If it is not sticky enough, the dough
will not be sufficiently cohesive to be formed by sheeting, and the final product does not
have the desired crumb structure. It is necessary to have an appropriate extent of stick-
iness to hold the folded layers of dough together and to prevent large holes in the final
baked food. Viscoelastic properties of gluten affect the rheological and textural properties
of wheat dough. When the dough is developed by mixing, the gluten proteins form con-
tinuous three-dimensional viscoelastic network throughout the dough with starch granules
Downloaded by [Australian National University] at 10:04 10 January 2015

behaving as filler. The three-dimensional structure of gluten matrix is stabilized by covalent

(disulfide), hydrogen and non-covalent ionic bonds, and hydrophobic interactions. The bal-
ance between gliadins and glutenins is responsible for important rheological properties such
as viscosity and elasticity.[11,12] Khatkar et al.[8] studied the effect of various gliadin sub-
fractions on the mixograph properties and observed that the resistance breakdown (RBD)
values increased with addition of gliadin and its subgroups, while Uthayakumaran et al.[13]
reported that addition of gliadin subgroups reduce peak dough resistance (PDR) and RBD.
Thus, numerous studies have been carried out on the study of glutenins on the mixing char-
acteristics of the flour,[14] but very little and contradictory literature is available on the effect
of gliadins on mixing behavior of dough. Moreover, the effect of these subfractions on the
pasting properties and texture profile analysis (TPA) has not been reported in the literature
so far. Thus, the study was aimed to investigate the effect of gliadins and glutenins on the
rheological, pasting, and textural properties of the dough so as to deduce their effect on the
end product quality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Flour Sample
Straight grade flour, milled from wheat variety HW 2004 on Chopin mill was used for
the study. The flour had moisture 11.32 g/100 g flour, protein 10.06 g/100 g flour protein
and 0.54 g/100 g flour as determined by AACC Approved methods 44–15A, 46–30.[15]
This flour was used for extraction of gliadins and glutenins fractions and as base flour for
addition of these subfractions.

Preparation of Protein Fractions

HW 2004 flour (100 g) was gently shaken with chloroform (200 ml) at room tem-
perature and then filtered through filter paper to obtain defatted flour. The defatted flour
was then allowed to dry at room temperature. Gluten was extracted from the defatted flour
with Perten Glutomatic (2200) and the resulting gluten was freeze dried. The freeze dried
gluten samples were ground in a pestle mortar and dissolved in 200 ml of 70% ethanol.
The mixture was stirred on a magnetic stirrer for 3 h at 25◦ C followed by centrifugation
for 30 min at 1000 g at 4◦ C. Supernatant was collected and the pellet was again extracted
with 70% ethanol. The supernatants were pooled and ethanol was removed from the gliadin
 1430 BARAK, MUDGIL, AND KHATKAR

extracts using rotary evaporator at 30◦ C. The gliadin and glutenin fractions, thus, obtained
were freeze dried and powdered in pestle and mortar.

Gliadin and Glutenin Addition and Mixing Effects

Changes in the dough mixing properties of the base flour were determined by a 4 g
micro doughlab. The base flour (HW 2004) was supplemented with increasing amount of
gliadin and glutenin fractions, i.e., 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 g/100 g, respectively. The gluten
subfraction was added to the base flour and put into the mixing bowl of micro doughlab.
The instrument allows the dry mixing of the flour for one minute followed by the addition of
water as determined by the instrument to reach the 500 FU line in the chart. The mixing of
the dough continued for 12 min for all the gliadin fortified flours. However, for the glutenin
Downloaded by [Australian National University] at 10:04 10 January 2015

fortified flours, the mixing time was manually increased to 30 min as the dough became too
strong and the departure time could not be determined in 12 min cycle. The different mixing
parameters determined by the micro doughlab were peak (FU), arrival time (min), dough
development time (min), dough stability (min), departure time (min), dough softening (FU),
peak energy (Wh/Kg) and bandwidth at peak (FU), respectively.

Gliadin and Glutenin Addition and Pasting Characteristics

The changes in the pasting characteristics of the base flour were determined by Rapid
Visco Analyzer-TecMaster (Perten Instruments)(RVA) according to the AACC approved
method 76–21. The gliadin and glutenin fractions were added to the base flour at 2, 4, 6, 8,
and 10 g/100 g level, respectively. The different parameters determined by the RVA were
peak viscosity, breakdown, trough, setback, final viscosity, pasting temperature, (◦ C) and
peak time (min). All the parameters were expressed in Rapid Visco Units (RVU).

Instrumental TPA of Gliadin and Glutenin Added Dough

Dough samples prepared in the 4 g micro doughlab were studied using TPA.
Cylindrical samples of 2 cm diameter and height 1 cm were obtained from dough. Samples
were compressed to 75% of their original height. A plate-plate sensor system with a
stainless probe SMSP/75 was used at a constant rate of 0.5 mm/sec. The texture of the
dough was determined by a uniaxial compression test of two cycles (TPA) using TA-XT2i
Texture Analyzer. Parameters such as hardness, adhesiveness, cohesiveness, and consis-
tency were analyzed. Hardness is the maximum force obtained during the first compression
cycle. Adhesiveness is the negative area obtained during the first cycle. Cohesiveness was
obtained as the ratio between the positive areas of the second cycle and the first cycle.
Consistency is the sum of the positive areas of the first and the second cycles.

Recovery of Gluten and Determination of Gluten Index

The dough with and without the addition of gliadin and glutenin fractions were pre-
pared in micro doughlab and rested in water for 30 min. The dough was then washed under
running tap water to remove the water soluble components such as starch. The weight of the
resulting wet gluten was noted. The wet gluten was then centrifuged in gluten centrifuge to
obtain the gluten index of the gliadin and glutenin fortified gluten.
 INFLUENCE OF GLIADIN AND GLUTENIN ON DOUGH PROPERTIES 1431

Statistical Analysis
The experimental data collected was analyzed for significant differences with the
help of analysis of variance (ANOVA) and correlation analysis was conducted using SPSS
16.0 software.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Effect of Added Gliadin and Glutenin on Rheological Properties
The results of the addition of gliadin and glutenin fractions on the rheological prop-
erties of the dough have been presented in Table 1. The peak height of the base flour was
Downloaded by [Australian National University] at 10:04 10 January 2015

reported to be 510 FU. The peak dough height decreased considerably upon addition of
the gliadins at increasing concentrations from 2–10 g/100 g, respectively. On the other
hand, addition of glutenins to the base flour increased its peak dough height value upto
573 FU for 10 g/100 g glutenin addition. The peak dough height is an indicator of dough
strength, i.e., the ability of the proteins to withstand the stress of mixing. Gliadin fortifica-
tion caused the decrease in the peak dough height indicating the weakening of the dough.
Dough development time decreased significantly from 3.5 to 2.02 min upon the addition of
10 g/100 g gliadins. The addition of 10 g/100 g gliadin to the base flour caused the max-
imum reduction in the time required for the optimum dough development indicating the
shorter mixing time requirement to form optimum dough. This could be due to the alter-
ation in the gliadin-glutenin balance in the dough and interaction of gluten subfractions
with the base flour components. However, the added glutenins increased the time required
for the development of dough. Moreover the glutenin increased the dough stability to as
long as 30 min (10 g/100 g addition) while the added gliadins lowered the dough sta-
bility considerably. The doughs with added glutenins showed longer dough development
time and produced more stable doughs with lesser degree of softening than the doughs
supplemented with gliadins. The glutenins were effective in delaying the optimum dough
development time with 10 g/100 g glutenins being the most effective in delaying the mixing

Table 1 Effect of gliadins and glutenins on micro doughlab parameters.

Sample PDH (FU) AT (min) DDT (min) DT (min) DS (min) DSO (FU) PE (Wh/kg) BWP (FU)

Control Gliadin 510f 1.80e 3.50f 5.00f 3.20e 89.98e 5.60f 49.98a
2% 508e 1.70d 2.70e 3.90e 2.20d 119.95f 4.00e 49.98a
4% 500d 1.60c 2.45d 3.40d 1.80c 119.95f 3.30d 49.98a
6% 498c 1.50b 2.38c 3.30c 1.80c 119.95f 3.10c 49.98a
8% 494b 1.50b 2.27b 3.20b 1.70b 121.96g 3.00b 49.98a
10% 491a 1.40a 2.02a 2.90a 1.40a 124.95h 2.60a 49.98a
Glutenin
2% 519g 1.80e 3.50f 5.00f 3.40f 59.98d 5.60f 49.98a
4% 534h 1.80e 3.92g 10.0g 8.10g 24.99c 5.70g 49.98a
6% 544i 1.80e 3.92g 15.0h 13.20h 19.99b 6.20h 54.98b
8% 564j 2.20f 4.55h 20.0i 17.90i 14.99a 7.70i 59.98c
10% 573k 2.20f 4.67i 30.0j 27.80j 14.99a 7.70i 59.98c

PDH: peak dough height; AT: arrival time; DDT: dough development time; DS: dough stability; DSO: dough
softening; PE: peak energy; BWP: bandwidth at peak.
Values followed by different letters are significantly different at P < 0.05.
 1432 BARAK, MUDGIL, AND KHATKAR

time from 3.50 to 4.67 min. The resistance to the mixing of flour was due to the differences
in gliadin to glutenin ratio of the flours. The addition of glutenins greatly increased the
departure time indicating that the dough became stronger upon the addition of the fraction.
Stability of the dough, indicating flours tolerance to mixing is important in deciding the
end use quality of the wheat flour. It is generally recommended that stronger doughs with
higher stability (hard flour) perform well for bread making while flours of lower stability
(soft flour) produce good cookies and cakes. In the present study, it was found that the
dough stability can be improved by the addition of glutenin fraction to the flour. Similar
results were reported by Uthayakumaran et al.[16] who found that increasing the Glu:Gli
ratio improves the dough strength. A correlation between dough strength and glutenin pro-
teins has been previously reported by Primo-Martin et al.[17] Barak et al.[18] also reported
that Gli:Glu ratio significantly affect the dough strength properties. Moreover, it can be sug-
Downloaded by [Australian National University] at 10:04 10 January 2015

gested that flours with higher glutenin content produce highly stable doughs that perform
well during bread making allowing the dough to rise during fermentation and improving
the load volume. Softening of dough plays an important role in determining the machine
ability of the dough. Doughs too soft make the dough handling difficult during the pro-
cessing of dough for food product. Gliadins have been known to be responsible for the
viscous nature of the dough. Similarly, in this study it was found that as the percentage
of gliadins in the flour increased, the degree of softening increased significantly while the
higher glutenin levels markedly decreased the degree of dough softening. The peak energy
is the amount of energy required by the dough to reach the peak height. Peak energy values
decreased with increment in the gliadin concentration in the flour. The gliadin fractions in
combination with the base flour were ineffective in producing changes in the band width.
However, the glutenin fraction mixed with HW 2004 base flour at higher percentage (6, 8,
and 10 g/100 g) showed a significant increase in band width at peak.

Effect of Gliadin and Glutenin Addition on Pasting Characteristics

The rapid visco analyzer indicates starch viscosity by measuring the resistance of
flour and water slurry to the stirring action of a paddle. The highest point during the heat-
ing cycle is the peak viscosity. The pasting behavior of the gluten fractions supplemented
dough has been presented in Table 2. The highest peak viscosity (198.92 RVU) was shown
by the base flour HW 2004. The peak viscosity decreased with the increase in percentage
of gliadins and glutenins added. This decrease could be attributed to the fact that the peak
viscosity reflects the resistance of the paste to the rotating paddle and is mainly attributed
to the quantity and quality of the starch in a particular wheat variety. Moreover, it has been
reported that higher content of starch in flours, to some extent, contributes to higher past-
ing viscosities.[19] In the present study, a percentage of the flour was replaced with protein
fraction (gliadin and glutenin). As a result, the peak viscosity showed a gradual decrease
as the levels of the gliadin and glutenin in the flour increased. Also, peak viscosity indi-
cates the maximum swelling of the starch granules which could be adversely affected by
the presence of higher protein which competes for the water along with the starch granules.
The lowest peak viscosity (140.25 RVU) was observed upon addition of 10 g/100 g gliadin
fraction. Breakdown indicates the stability of the paste during cooking, with lower break-
down viscosity inferring better resistance to shear thinning of flour pastes. The base flour
HW 2004 showed the highest value of breakdown viscosity (49.25 RVU). It was observed
that upon supplementation of flour with gliadin and glutenin fractions the breakdown vis-
cosity decreased indicating the increased resistance of the flour pastes to shear thinning.
 INFLUENCE OF GLIADIN AND GLUTENIN ON DOUGH PROPERTIES 1433

Table 2 Effect of gliadins and glutenins on pasting characteristics.

Peak η Trough BKDN STBK Final η Past temp

Sample (RVU) (RVU) (RVU) (RVU) (RVU) PT (min) (◦ C)

Control Gliadin 198.92k 149.67k 49.25k 133.42j 283.08k 6.13i 67.75c

2% 186.25i 137.58i 48.67j 137.08k 274.67j 5.80c 67.70b
4% 174.42g 131.42f 43.00g 127.83i 259.25g 5.80c 67.70b
6% 161.42d 123.08d 38.33d 120.75f 243.83e 5.87d 67.75c
8% 150.75b 114.33b 36.42b 116.33d 231.67c 5.60b 67.65a
10% 140.25a 107.75a 32.50a 105.83a 213.58a 5.53a 67.70b
Glutenin
2% 187.08j 142.00j 45.08i 124.92g 266.92i 6.10h 67.80d
4% 181.83h 137.00h 44.83h 126.58h 263.58h 6.00f 67.85e
Downloaded by [Australian National University] at 10:04 10 January 2015

6% 172.92f 132.50g 40.42f 118.00e 250.50f 6.00f 67.65a

8% 165.00e 126.58e 38.42e 111.00c 237.58d 6.07g 68.10f
10% 159.33c 122.17c 37.17c 107.92b 230.08b 5.93e 68.15g

Peak η: peak viscosity; BKDN: breakdown; STBK: setback; Final η: final viscosity; PT: peak time; Past temp:
pasting temperature.
Values followed by different letters are significantly different at P < 0.05.

This could be due to interaction of the increased levels of gluten subfractions with the
flour components. The increased protein levels seemed to provide some protection against
the breakdown. Setback is the recovery of the viscosity during cooling of the heated flour
suspension. The setback viscosity decreased with the increase in the percentage of gliadins
and glutenins added to flour. Highest setback viscosity was reported by base flour HW 2004
(133.42 RVU) while lowest setback viscosity (105.83 RVU) was observed with 10 g/100 g
addition of gliadins to the base flour. Final viscosity of the flour paste is dependent on the
starch content, amylose, amylopectin, amylose/amylopectin ratio.[20] Final viscosity of the
flours increases due to the aggregation of the amylose molecules.[21] The final viscosity
decreased significantly from 283.08 RVU (base flour) to 213.58 RVU (10 g/100 g gliadin
addition) upon replacing a particular percentage of flour with gliadin and glutenins. Pasting
temperature indicates the minimum temperature required to cook as well as the temperature
at which the viscosity increases during the heating process. The added fractions of gliadins
and glutenin were ineffective in producing remarkable effect on the pasting temperature.
The pasting time indicates the time at which the viscosity of the flour paste first begins to
increase. Pasting time did not follow any specific pattern in the present study. The principal
finding of the study was the varying effect of gliadin and glutenins on altering the pasting
properties. Gliadins were more effective in decreasing the values of pasting properties than
glutenins. The rapid visco analyzer measures the resistance of the flour and water slurry to
the stirring action of a paddle. Gliadins are considered to have a compact globular structure
as compared to glutenins, which have a β sheet structure and tends to form an entangled
network upon hydration. So, when a part of the flour was replaced by the above proteins in
the present study, the glutenins formed a network throughout the flour paste and provided
greater resistance to the stirring blade than the gliadins and resulted in higher flour pasting
properties value than those obtained for gliadins.

TPA of Gliadin and Glutenin Added Dough

The textural characteristics of the dough prepared with and without the addition of
gluten subfractions are presented in Table 3. Varying the percentage of gliadin and glutenin
 1434 BARAK, MUDGIL, AND KHATKAR

Table 3 Texture profile analysis of gliadin and glutenin fortified dough.

Sample HD (g) AD (g.s) CO Consistency (g.s)

Control Gliadin 1482.3f −998.3f 0.89f 2968.1f

2% 1442.7e −1025.2g 0.90g 2642.3e
4% 1375.4d −1290.1h 0.92h 2220.6d
6% 1223.9c −1455.2i 0.95i 1975.7c
8% 1119.3b −1589.2j 0.97j 1958.1b
10% 1025.6a −1702.3k 0.98k 1801.2a
Glutenin
2% 1684.4g −886.5e 0.83e 3106.2g
4% 1954.7h −826.9d 0.79d 3634.3h
6% 1960.2i −800.3c 0.78c 3729.7i
−759.6b
Downloaded by [Australian National University] at 10:04 10 January 2015

8% 2012.9j 0.61b 3750.5j

10% 2119.3k −625.4a 0.47a 3772.4k

HD: dough hardness; AD: dough adhesiveness; CO: dough cohesiveness.

Values followed by different letters are significantly different at P < 0.05.

in the base flour changed the textural characteristics of dough significantly. The hardness
increased significantly from 1482.3 g (base flour) to 2119.3 g (10 g/100 g glutenin addi-
tion). On the other hand the addition of gliadins significantly lowered the hardness value
to as low as 1025.6 g (10 g/100 g gliadin addition). It could be due to the fact that addi-
tion of glutenin to the flour made it stronger and thus it required more force to compress
it to 75% while addition of gliadins made the dough weaker lowering its hardness val-
ues. It is long accepted fact that gliadins make the dough viscous while glutenins make
the dough elastic. Adhesiveness is termed as the ability of the dough to get separated
from the probe. The addition of gliadin to the base flour at increasing levels increased the
adhesiveness of the dough making it difficult for the dough to get separated from the testing
probe. The adhesiveness increased remarkably from –998.3 gs (base flour) to –1702.3 gs
(10 g/100 g gliadin addition). On the other hand, addition of glutenin to the flour decreased
the adhesiveness of the dough and increased its elasticity property as a result of which the
dough did not adhered to the probe. The adhesiveness decreased from –886.5 gs (2 g/100 g
glutenin) to –625.4 gs (10 g/100 g glutenin). The gliadins are generally responsible for
the cohesiveness and extensibility of the dough while the glutenins make the dough more
rubbery and elastic.[22] The cohesiveness of the dough increased with the increase in the
concentration of gliadin proteins in the flour. The cohesiveness of base flour was reported
to be 0.89 which increased to 0.98 upon the addition of 10 g/100 g gliadins. On the other
hand, glutenins remarkably lowered the cohesiveness to 0.47 (10 g/100 g glutenin addi-
tion). Consistency is obtained from the combined areas under the two curves obtained from
the TPA curve. Higher consistency values infer stronger dough. The higher gliadin levels
in the dough decreased the consistency values while the presence of higher glutenin levels
increased it.

Gluten Recovery and Assessment of the Gluten Quality

To determine the role of added gliadins and glutenins on the gluten recovery, exper-
iments were conducted on 4 g batches of HW 2004 base flour. Flour samples with and
without the addition of 2 g/100 g, 4 g/100 g, 6 g/100 g, 8 g/100 g, and 10 g/100 g
gliadins and glutenins were formed into dough in micro doughlab. The quantity of gluten
 INFLUENCE OF GLIADIN AND GLUTENIN ON DOUGH PROPERTIES 1435

recovered from the base flour and base flour fortified with different percentages of gliadin
and glutenins are presented in Table 4. The addition of gliadins and glutenins increased
the wet gluten recovered from the dough from 24.89% (base flour) to 49.48% (10 g/100 g
gliadin addition) and 47.98% (10 g/100 g glutenin addition), respectively. The proportional
increase in the amount of wet gluten recovered from the gliadin and glutenin supplemented
flour demonstrate the involvement of these proteins in the formation of gluten network.
However, the gluten recovery from the gliadin supplemented flours was greater than the
glutenin supplemented flours because of the higher water binding capacity of gliadins as
compared to glutenin. Base flour supplemented with 10 g/100 g gliadins showed the high-
est increase in percentage recovery of gluten (98.79%). The quality of the gluten recovered
from the various proportions of flour was assessed by gluten index. The gluten index is cal-
culated from the amount of gluten remaining on the sieve after centrifugation of the gluten.
Downloaded by [Australian National University] at 10:04 10 January 2015

Greater amount of gluten on the sieve is directly proportional to better quality of the gluten.
In the present study, it was found that the addition of gliadins to the flour greatly lowered
the gluten index while the addition of glutenins improved it. The base flour had the gluten
index of 56.80%. The supplementation of gliadins to the flour lowered the gluten index to
as low as 2.76 (10 g/100 g addition), while the addition of glutenins increased the gluten
index to 91.50 (10 g/100 g addition), respectively. The above results confirmed the role of
glutenins in imparting strength to the dough and the higher levels of gliadins in a particular
wheat variety resulting in weaker gluten quality and dough.

Correlations Among Various Dough Rheological, Pasting

Characteristics, and Textural Quality of Dough
The results of the correlation analysis among various parameters have been presented
in Table 5. The peak dough height obtained in the micro doughlab graph correlated posi-
tively with dough development time (0.958), dough stability (0.952), peak energy (0.951),
and band width at peak (0.802). However peak dough height was weakly negatively associ-
ated with setback viscosity (–0.350). Moreover, dough softening and cohesiveness showed
strong negative correlation with peak height. Dough development time was found to be
negatively associated with dough softening, cohesiveness and setback viscosity. The peak

Table 4 Recovery of gluten and gluten index of gliadin and glutenin added doughs.

Sample Wet gluten (%) Increase in recovery of gluten (%) Gluten index

Control Gliadin 24.89a 0 56.80f

2% 33.31c 33.82b 44.09e
4% 39.20e 57.49d 21.56d
6% 44.71h 79.63g 19.30c
8% 47.24i 89.79h 6.43b
10% 49.48k 98.79j 2.76a
Glutenin
2% 31.98b 28.48a 75.18g
4% 35.92d 44.31c 82.23h
6% 39.25f 57.69e 85.47i
8% 41.88g 68.26f 88.45j
10% 47.98j 92.77i 91.50k

Values followed by different letters are significantly different at P < 0.05.

 Downloaded by [Australian National University] at 10:04 10 January 2015

Table 5 Correlations among dough rheological, pasting, and textural properties of dough.

PDH DDT DS DSO PE BWP PV BKD SBK FV HD AD CO GI

PDH 1
DDT 0.958∗∗ 1
DS 0.952∗∗ 0.857∗∗ 1
DSO −0.937∗∗ −0.995∗∗ −0.829∗∗ 1
PE 0.951∗∗ 0.993∗∗ 0.852∗∗ −0.931∗∗ 1
BWP 0.802∗∗ 0.668∗ 0.863∗∗ −0.632∗ 0.681∗ 1
PV 0.081 0.305 −0.138 −0.175 0.309 −0.291 1
BKD −0.050 0.157 −0.252 −0.015 0.160 −0.407 0.973∗∗ 1

1436
SBK −0.350 −0.173 −0.516 0.289 −0.178 −0.583 0.852∗∗ 0.933∗∗ 1
FV −0.089 0.127 −0.296 0.001 0.127 −0.414 0.979∗∗ 0.990∗∗ 0.939∗∗ 1
HD 0.948∗∗ 0.966∗∗ 0.830∗∗ −0.962∗∗ 0.943∗∗ 0.618∗ 0.326 0.193 −0.106 0.166 1
AD −0.871∗∗ −0.935∗∗ −0.726∗ 0.869∗∗ −0.930∗∗ −0.501 −0.546 −0.430 −0.122 −0.396 −0.956∗∗ 1
CO −0.973∗∗ −0.915∗∗ −0.972∗∗ 0.859∗∗ −0.914∗∗ −0.815∗∗ −0.020 0.095 0.391 0.146 −0.888∗∗ 0.821∗∗ 1
GI 0.897∗∗ 0.964∗∗ 0.744∗∗ −0.941∗∗ 0.954∗∗ 0.533 0.445 0.313 −0.008 0.289 0.973∗∗ −0.977∗∗ −0.827∗∗ 1
PDH: peak dough height; DDT: dough development time; DS: dough stability; DSO: dough softening; PE: peak energy; BWP: bandwidth at peak; PV: peak viscosity; BKD: breakdown;
SBK: setback; FV: final viscosity; HD: dough hardness; AD: dough adhesiveness; CO: dough cohesiveness; GI: gluten index.
∗ Correlation is significant at 0.05 level.
∗∗ Correlation is significant at 0.01 level.
 INFLUENCE OF GLIADIN AND GLUTENIN ON DOUGH PROPERTIES 1437

energy was found to be positively correlated (0.681) with the band width at peak. Band
width at peak was negatively associated with the pasting properties of the flour. However,
it was positively associated with the dough hardness and cohesiveness. The peak viscos-
ity was found to be positively correlated with breakdown, setback, and final viscosity and
weakly negatively correlated with cohesiveness. Breakdown viscosity was positively corre-
lated with all the textural properties of dough. Dough hardness was found to be positively
correlated with gluten index indicating that flours with higher glutenin levels have higher
dough hardness while dough adhesiveness and cohesiveness showed negative correlations,
respectively. In the present study, the addition of gliadins to the base flour at increasing
levels increased the adhesiveness and cohesiveness of the dough while lowering the gluten
index. Gluten index was also found to be positively associated with the peak dough height
(0.897), dough development time (0.964), and dough stability (0.744), respectively.
Downloaded by [Australian National University] at 10:04 10 January 2015

CONCLUSION
The results of the study revealed the influence of gluten subfractions on dough
properties. The base flour fortified with different gliadins and glutenins concentrations
showed different mixing characteristics. Gliadins decreased the dough development time
and increased the softening of the dough. The peak dough height showed significant pos-
itive correlation with the dough hardness. Band width at peak was negatively associated
with the pasting properties of the flour. Breakdown viscosity was positively correlated with
all the textural properties of dough Peak energy was positively correlated to dough stability.
Greater gluten was recovered from the gliadin and glutenin fortified flours. Gluten index
was positively influenced by the presence of glutenin proteins. The results of the study
clearly indicated the role of gliadins and glutenins on the flour properties. The findings
of the study could help in improving the properties of the flour so as to enhance the end
product quality.

REFERENCES
1. Barak, S.; Mudgil, D.; Khatkar, B.S. Biochemical and functional properties of
gliadins: A review. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrtition 2014(in press)
DOI:10.1080/10408398.2012.654863.
2. Majzoobi, M.; Farahnaky, A.; Amiri, S. Physicochemical characteristics of starch component
of wheat flours obtained from fourteen Iranian wheat cultivars. International Journal of Food
Properties 2011, 14, 685–696.
3. Singh, S.; Singh, N.; MacRitchie, F. Relationship of polymeric proteins with pasting, gel
dynamic, and dough empirical-rheology in different Indian wheat varieties. Food Hydrocolloids
2011, 25, 19–24.
4. Weiser, H. Chemistry of glutenin proteins. Food Microbiology 2007, 24, 115–119.
5. Khatkar, B.S.; Fido, R.J.; Tatham, A.S.; Schofield, J.D. Functional properties of wheat gliadins:
2. Effects on dynamic rheological properties of wheat gluten. Journal of Cereal Science 2002,
35, 307–313.
6. Bloksma, A.H. Dough structure, dough rheology, and baking quality. Cereal Foods World 1990,
35, 237–244.
7. Ewart, J.A.D. Glutenin structure. Journal of Science of Food and Agriculture 1979, 30, 482–492.
8. Khatkar, B.S.; Fido, R.J.; Tatham, A.S.; Schofield, J.D. Functional properties of wheat gliadins:
1. Effects on mixing characteristics and bread making quality. Journal of Cereal Science 2002,
35, 299–306.
 1438 BARAK, MUDGIL, AND KHATKAR

9. Singh, M.; Khatkar, B.S. Structural and functional properties of wheat storage proteins: A review.
Journal of Food Science and Technology 2005, 42, 455–471.
10. Song, Y.; Zheng, Q. Influence of gliadin removal on strain hardening of hydrated wheat gluten
during equibiaxial extensional deformation. Journal of Cereal Science 2008, 48, 58–67.
11. Gomez, A.; Ferrero, C.; Calvelo, A.; Anon, M.C.; Puppo, M.C. Effect of mixing time on struc-
tural and rheological properties of wheat flour dough for breadmaking. International Journal of
Food Properties 2011, 14, 583–598.
12. Khatkar, B.S.; Bell, A.E.; Schofield, J.D. The dynamic rheological properties of glutens and
gluten subfractions from wheats of good and poor bread-making quality. Journal of Cereal
Science 1995, 22, 29–44.
13. Uthayakumaran, S.; Tomoskozi, S.; Tatham, A.S.; Savage, A.W.J.; Gianibelli, M.C.; Stoddard,
F.L.; Bekes F. Effects of gliadin fractions on functional properties of wheat dough depending on
molecular size and hydrophobicity. Cereal Chemistry 2001, 78, 138–141.
Downloaded by [Australian National University] at 10:04 10 January 2015

14. Grasberger, A.; Schieberle, P.; Koehler, P. Fractionation and reconstitution of wheat flour-effect
on dough rheology and baking. European Food Research and Technology 2003, 216, 204–211.
15. AACC. Approved Methods of the American association of Cereal Chemists, 10th Ed; AACC: St.
Paul, MN, USA, 2000.
16. Uthayakumaran, S.; Gras, P.W.; Stoddard, F.L.; Bekes, F. Effect of varying protein content and
glutenin-to-gliadin ratio on the functional properties of wheat dough. Cereal Chemistry 1999,
76, 389–394.
17. Primo-Martin, C.; Valera, R.; MartInez-Anaya, M.A. Effect of pentosanase and oxidases on the
characteristics of doughs and the glutenin macropolymer (GMP). Journal of Agricultural and
Food Chemistry 2003, 51, 4673–4679.
18. Barak, S.; Mudgil, D.; Khatkar, B.S. Effect of compositional variation of gluten proteins
and rheological characteristics of wheat flour on the textural quality of white salted noodles.
International Journal of Food Properties 2014, 17 (4). DOI:10.1080/10942912.2012.675611.
19. Ragaee, S.; Abdel-Aal, E.S.M. Pasting properties of starch and protein in selected cereals and
quality of their food products. Food Chemistry 2006, 95, 9–18.
20. Tester, R.F.; Morrison, W.R. Swelling and amylosization of cereal starches. I. Effects of
amylopectin, amylose, and lipids. Cereal Chemistry 1990, 67, 551–557.
21. Miles, M.J.; Morris, V.J.; Orford, P.D.; Ring, S.G. The roles of amylose and amylopectin in the
gelation and retrogradation of starch. Carbohydrate Research 1985, 135, 271–281.
22. Rodrigues, M.M.F.; Martins, M.M.; Costa, M.L.B. Thermal properties of gluten proteins of two
soft wheat varieties. Food Chemistry 2003, 93, 459–465.