To elevate dietary fibre content in wheat bread, two additions of barley flour were tested (30 % and 50 %), and further 5 % or 10 % of chia or teff wholemeals. Chia elevated dietary fibre content more effectively than teff did (up to 6.41 % and 4.29 %, respectively). Non‑gluten nature of proteins in non‑traditional raw materials also affected farinograph, amylograph and mixolab proof results. Water absorption increased about 10 % in total, especially owing to teff presence in composite flour. All three alternative crops decelerated dough development and prolonged its stability, but dough softening degree depended on their combination. Higher water absorption was reflected in viscosity rise during amylograph testing. Using mixolab equipment, significantly more accurate differentiation of tested composites was reached, both in phase of dough kneading and registration of viscosity during heating and cooling. Contrary to this, any statistically verifiable difference was observed between chia or teff wholemeal variants from white of dark seeds. By variance analysis, some rheological parameters (dough softening degree, torque point C5, mixolab energy) together with specific bread volume were identified as principal for samples distinguishing. In terms of flour and bread quality, barley flour portion had a prevailing effect for chia tri‑composites. Reversely, quality of flour blends containing teff was dependent on both barley flour and teff wholemeal portion and type.
Formulation, sensory evaluation, proximate composition and storage stability of cassava strips produced from the composite flour of cassava and cowpea
