الفهرس 
Materials and mithodsOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 127 |  |  |
| | | from | 127 | | |
Abstract
SoybeanS (HarO Soy variety) were extracted with
hexane and treated by autoclaving for :<0minutes at 108°0
for inactivation of trypsin inhibitor. were used for supplementation
of wheat flour of 7:<%extraction (Super x
variety). The whoat flour and defatted soy flour were
chemicallY analyzed. Mixtures consisting of wheat flour
and defatted soy flour at a concentration ranging from 5
to :<0%in the mixture ”ere formulated. The resulting
flour lJl.ixtures were made into dough to studY the rheological
properties of the dough. ~ter bakinl’; into bread,
the resulting lOaves were organoleptioallY evaluated.
Furthermore. diets were formulated based upon protein
content for feeding experimental rats for biolOgical
evaluation of the protein e;fter supplementation. The
findings could be summarizedas followS :
1. The chemical analysis of ”heat flour of 72%
extraction and defatted soy flour was’ crude protein
9.5 and 49.5%. ether extract 1.39 and 1.:<3%.ash 1.25
and 7.
4
5%. crude fibers 3.6 and 7.5:<%.NFE 70.46 and 25.56%
respectivelY ·
:<. The farinograph tests for doughs _de from .•b•.ea
t
flour and increased levels of defatted soy flcur showed
--~~-_._- -- ---_ .._-”._.-
- 102
that the water absorption capacity increased slightly as
soy flour concentration was increased,while there was a
marked increase in mixing time. Weakeningvalue decreased
sharply from 160 :au for wheat flour to 10 Bll with flour of
20% soy :flour, while the valorimeter value was increased.
3. The extensigraph test showedthat addition of more
than 5% defatted soy flour caused a weakening of dough
strengtb. Addition of up to 10%soy flour increased the
resistance to extension, while greater supplementation levels
caused a decrease in resistance. Maximumextensibility
reading was found with 5% soy flour.
4. Very slight differences were noticed in gas production
in dough fermonted for 5 hours from different levels
of supplementation.
5. The general appearance of bread IGaves showed
that the shape values gradually decreased, while more
tenderness and crust color was noticed with 5 and 10% supplementation
levels. The differences were significant between
the control and levels of supplementation.
6. Values for crumbcolor, texture and grain showed
that no significant difference s are between the control
and up to 10%soy flour supplements.
- 103 -
7. For tasto;. 5% soy flour bread ranked first followed
by 107. tben tbe control. However. for tbe odor the control
was best.
8. The amin6 acids content of breads supplemented by
gradually increasing the concentration of soy :flour showed
g:cadual increase in same aminO aoids. However, :few amino
acids such as threonine and tryptopha!t) showed slight decrease.
9. The chemical scores calculated for protein showed
that lysine is the limiting aminO acid in wheat and its
products, while the total sulfUr amino acids are limiting
in tho full fat soy beans and the defatted heat’ treated
product. Supplementation with soy flour compensated greatly
:for the lysine deficiency. On the other hand” leucine became
the next limitir..g at1ino acid in soy supplemented breads.
10. from the values of’ PERand NPR; supplementation
of bread protein with casein or with soy flour and casein
(in 10%soy flour bread) resulted in a dietary protein blend
whose Dutrit iva quality VJasbetter than that of casein or
of bread supplemented with soy flour only (20% soy bread).
11. The NPUfor all tested diets were similar except
fox the diets containing 20%soy bread which was lower.
-------,-----_._.--- _.. ---
-- - - - -- .- ---- ---_._---_. __ ._------------------
104- -
12. from the DC values; the tp~ee diets con~aining
bread protein were significantly less digestible than
casein.
13. from the BV values; supplementation of bread
p~otein with casein alone or with a mixtuxs.af cassin and
de:fatted soy floux significantly improved its protein quality
than when was supplemented with 8.5% soy flour (20% BOY
bread).