Megan Allen Foods & Nutrition 453 Individual Project Written Report The Effect of Different Amount of Flour vs. All- Flour on Banana Muffins. Abstract: One would think they could just pick up any type of muffin and eat begin to eat it, care free. For a lot of people this is true, but for people who have celiac disease, it is quite the opposite. Celiac disease, according to the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, is a digestive disease that damages the small intestines. It does this by hindering the absorption of nutrients coming from food. People who have celiac disease can not absorb the protein gluten; therefore they can not ingest food like wheat, rye, barley, and most flours (NIDDK, 2007). By creating a gluten-free muffin that is similar to the original all-purpose floured muffin, in volume, texture, and taste, this would open up doors for people with celiac disease. The idea is to test the different amounts of chickpea flour verses the all-purpose flour; in which one can see if there are any similarities between the two. If there are any similarities between the two, then what is the ratio of chickpea and all-purpose flour is in the muffin to give it the ideal volume, texture, and taste. Introduction: The Celiac Disease Foundation defines celiac disease as a lifelong autoimmune intestinal disorder. Celiac disease is unique because a specific food group, food with gluten for that matter, is the activator (Celiac Foundation, 1998). Gluten is an important protein nutritionally and also can be found in many foods around us. It is found in wheat, rye, barley, and many flours (Wikipedia, 2005). Celiac disease is more common then people really think; in that 1 in 133 people in the United States have it. Since it is a genetically-linked disease, celiac disease occurs 5-15% of the offspring and siblings of a person with it (Celiac Foundation, 1998). People with celiac disease have very restrictive lives and very restrictive diets; for example they must make sure every baked good was baked with gluten-free flour. If someone were to ingest a product with gluten, their immune system will be compromised by having the small intestines be destroyed. The villi, that would normally absorb all the nutrients from food, would be because damaged and/or destroyed. These villi, that cover the small intestine, cover the vast majority of the surface area of it and are the main source of how the body would absorb nutrients. If these villi are damaged/ destroyed, then a person will become malnourished, no matter how much food they eat (NIDDK, 2007). There are many symptoms/ signs of a person with celiac disease. Some included abdominal bloating/pain, gas, constipation, anemia, osteoporosis, seizures, mouth sores, etc. The only treatment for people who have celiac disease is to follow a gluten-free diet. By doing this, the symptoms will stop and the small intestine will heal what is left from the damage. It could take up to two years for an adult to completely heal their intestinal track (Celiac Foundation, 1998). A lot of people do not even realize they have celiac
disease and will go undiagnosed while suffering these unexplainable symptoms (Harder, 2003). These people can become very ill and malnourished. This is another reason for this experiment because gluten-free products should be more widely known and used by the population; for the matter that people can maybe even diagnosis themselves when they begin to see improvement on their health by using gluten-free products (such as chickpea flour). There are so many benefits to using gluten-free flour, such as chickpea, for not only people with celiac disease but for normal, healthy people. For instances, just like the experiment, people could start using chickpea flour instead for all-purpose flour in their baking. The chickpea flour in compared to allpurpose flour has a lot more added benefits. flour generally has fewer calories; but it does have more total fat than all-purpose. flour also has almost twice the amount of protein. It also has much more iron, calcium, and dietary carbohydrates than all-purpose flour contains. Having more of these nutrients can definitely make chickpea flour a more nutrient dense, better for you, food than all-purpose flour (Food Network, 2007) (About-Health, 2003). The only negative aspect of living a gluten-free diet is the fact that it is generally going to cost a person more money. Buying products that are gluten free are going to cost a bit more to purchase; for example gluten-free flour (chickpea) and especially pre-made gluten free products. Given that someone may have celiac disease, there is really nothing other to do then to purchase and cook the foods that will keep the person healthy. For the experiment, there were many different types of variables. The variables that were used to make the banana muffins were using all-purpose flour (that basic recipe), substituting all-purpose for chickpea flour, using 75% all-purpose flour and 25% chickpea, and lastly using 50% all-purpose and 50% chickpea. The control was the allpurpose flour because the idea was to see how much of a difference using all chickpea has on a muffin. The independent variables are the different amounts of flours. The dependent variables, or the variables that are being measured, are the volume, texture, and taste of the muffin. Methods: There were three different trials of the same experiment to see if the results could be valid and creditable. *Reminder- the process explaining experiment below was done three times. There was a basic recipe used: 20.63g/ 1.5 Cups all-purpose flour 5g/ 1tsp- baking powder 5g/ 1tsp- baking soda 3g/ 1tsp salt 3 large bananas, mashed 170g/ 0.75 Cups- sugar 1- egg Banana Muffins
38g/ 0.17 Cups- butter, melted Directions- Pre-heat over to 350 degrees Fahrenheit Shift together flour, baking powder, baking soda, and salt; then set aside. Combine mashed bananas, sugar, eggs, and melted butter in large bowl Fold in flour mixture and mix until smooth Pour batter into muffin pans that are lined with non-stick spray Bake in the pre-heated over for 25-30 minutes or until golden brown. o Once baked, let cool completely (especially before running test on the muffin). - This is just the basic recipe for Banana Muffins that makes about 12 muffins. For the experiment, two batch of this recipe was used, total; meaning twice the amount of ingredients listed was used to complete one trial. The double recipe ingredients was split four ways (for the four variables) when it came to one trial; with exception to the flour. This produced six muffins from each variable to choose from when testing. Following the basic recipe, one is able to follow the experiment just by replacing the all-purpose flour with the different variables. The all-purpose flour was the control for the experiment because it was used as a reference point to compare all of the other flours containing chickpea. Since the objective is to see how close one can get the chickpea flour muffin to resemble the original all-purpose muffin. To ensure consistency of size between all of the muffins, the batter was poured into the muffin tin to the very top of the well and leavened if needed. This ensures an even, straight amount for each muffin (even though it is suggested to keep one centimeter from the top on the muffin well to anticipate for the muffin to rise during baking). Once again, the variables were using the original recipe of all-purpose flour, and then the second variable was substituting allpurpose flour completely for the chickpea flour. The third variable was using 75% allpurpose flour and 25% chickpea flour and the last/ fourth variable was using 50% allpurpose flour and 50% chickpea flour. After all the muffins were done baking and cooled, then all that was left to do was test the results of the four varied muffins types. The dependent variables were testing the volume, texture, and taste of the each of the different types of muffins. For testing the volume of the muffins, the seed volume apparatus was used. First the machine had to be calibrated by having the seeds pour into the bottom half the chamber to see what the volume of the seeds by themselves was. Then the muffin was placed in seed the chamber, once the seeds were distributed back to the top chamber after tilting the machine. Then the apparatus was brought back right-side up to reveal what the total volume in the machine was now. To get the volume of the muffin though, one had to substrate the total volume of the apparatus minus the total volume of the apparatus with the muffin inside (Daniels, 2003). To test for texture, the stable micro system texture analyzer was used. This allows one to measure the force it takes to puncture food. Basically, it allows one to see how hard something is. There are different types of probes that can be used to test on certain
types of foods; therefore the one that was used for the muffins was the puncture probe. This was used because the muffins that came out of the over seemed to be hard on the outside and soft on the inside. This makes one think to use the puncture because of the different layers and the skin on the muffin (Daniel, 2003). The last test the banana muffins were given was to undergo a sensory evaluation. For the sensory evaluation, different groups (there were three different groups for each of the three trials consisting of ten people for each group) that rated the banana muffin on its appearance, texture, and flavor. The muffins were presented randomly to the group by different, nonconsecutive numbers. This would ensure credibility and more validity to the experiment; in that a group can be persuaded by numbers and orders in which an experimenter presents his/her product to them. To rate the three different categories, the ten people were asked to rate categories based on an hedonic scale. For appearance; 1 being the light brown and 9 being dark brown. For texture; 1 being very smooth/ soft and 9 being hard, tough, and/or bumpy/lumpy. For favorability: 1 being horrible tasting and not flavorful and 9 being very good/tasty and great flavor. An example of the sensory evaluation score sheet that was given to each of the individuals is below: Survey: Please sample each of the following types of Banana Muffin. The muffins have been randomized. If you could please rate each muffin on the following categories; Appearance, Texture, and Flavor on a hedonic scale: Appearance: 1-9; light brown dark brown Texture: 1-9; smooth/soft tough, hard, bumpy/ lumpy Flavor: 1-9; horrible/ no flavor very good/ great flavor Banana Muffin Sample 638 852 216 947 Appearance Texture Flavor
Results: These results are the all the date from all three of the trials. Also graph are represented below to provide more insight and further comparison of the trials. TRIAL 1: Experiment 1: Baked analysis Flour Type Volume (cm 3 ) Texture (g) All- 1185 19.9 1125 27.8, ¼ 1175 20.1 1150 24.0 TRIAL 2: Experiment 1: Baked analysis Flour Type Volume (cm 3 ) Texture (g) All- 1185 20.0 1130 27.5, ¼ 1170 20.3 1150 25.3 TRIAL 3: Experiment 1: Baked analysis Flour Type Volume (cm 3 ) Texture (g) All- 1190 20.2 1125 27.5, ¼ 1175 20.9 1155 24.5
Volume of Trial 1, 2, and 3 1200 1180 1160 Volume (cm3) 1140 1120 1100 1080 All-, ¼ Type of Flour Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Texture of Trials 1, 2, and 3 Texture (g) 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 All-, ¼ Types of Flour Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3
TRIAL 1: Experiment 2: Sensory Evaluation Appearance All- 6 5 6 5 7 6 5 5 5 5 8 7 6 7 7 6 7 8 7 7 6 6 6 5 6 6 5 5 5 5 6 7 6 7 7 7 5 6 6 6 Texture All- 5 4 6 3 5 3 4 3 3 3 6 5 6 5 6 6 5 4 5 6 5 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 3 4 6 5 6 5 5 3 5 6 6 5 Flavor All- 8 9 8 8 8 9 8 8 8 9 3 2 3 4 3 3 2 3 3 3 6 7 8 8 7 9 7 8 7 7 4 5 5 6 5 5 4 5 5 5
TRIAL 2: Experiment 2: Sensory Evaluation Appearance All- 6 5 5 5 6 7 6 5 6 6 7 7 8 7 8 7 6 8 7 6 6 6 5 6 5 5 6 6 5 5 7 7 6 6 7 5 6 5 6 6 Texture All- 4 5 3 3 4 4 3 5 3 3 6 6 5 4 5 6 6 5 5 6 4 5 4 3 4 4 4 5 5 3 6 5 5 6 6 5 3 6 5 5 Flavor All- 9 9 9 8 9 8 8 9 9 9 4 3 2 2 2 4 3 3 4 3 6 7 7 8 8 7 6 6 6 6 4 5 4 4 5 5 4 5 5 4
TRIAL 3: Experiment 2: Sensory Evaluation Appearance All- 5 5 6 7 7 5 6 6 5 6 7 8 7 8 7 6 7 6 7 7 6 5 6 7 5 6 5 6 6 5 6 7 6 5 6 7 6 7 6 5 Texture All- 3 5 3 3 4 5 4 4 3 3 5 6 6 5 4 5 5 6 6 5 4 5 4 3 4 4 4 5 5 3 6 5 5 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 Flavor All- 9 9 9 9 8 9 9 9 9 8 4 3 3 3 4 4 2 2 2 3 6 7 7 8 8 6 8 7 7 6 6 5 6 4 4 4 6 5 5 4
*This is an overall average of all three trials (together) for Experiment 1: Baked Analysis Flour Type Volume (cm 3 ) Texture (g) All- 1186.7 20.03 1126.7 27.6, ¼ 1173.3 20.43 1151.7 24.6 Experiment 1: Baked Analysis- Overview of all 3 trials Volume (cm3) Volume (cm3) 1200 1190 1180 1170 1160 1150 1140 1130 1120 1110 1100 1090 All-, ¼ Types of Flour Texture (g) Texture (g) 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 All-, ¼ Type of Flour *These next 3 tables are an overall average for each trial: sum of each group in Experiment 2: Sensory Evaluation
TRIAL 1: Sensory Analysis Flour Type Appearance Texture Flavor All- 5.5 3.9 8.3 7 5.4 2.9, ¼ 5.5 4.2 7.4 6.3 5.2 4.9 TRIAL 2: Sensory Analysis Flour Type Appearance Texture Flavor All- 5.7 3.7 8.7 7.1 5.4 3.0, ¼ 5.5 4.1 6.7 5.1 5.2 4.5 TRIAL 3: Sensory Analysis Flour Type Appearance Texture Flavor All- 5.8 3.7 8.8 7.0 5.3 3.0, ¼ 5.7 4.1 7.0 6.1 5.5 4.9 *This table is an overview of the sensory analysis survey from all three trials (together); sum of all of experiment 2 and its trials: Experiment 2: Sensory Evaluation- Overview Flour Type Appearance Texture Flavor All- 5.67 3.77 8.60 7.03 5.37 2.07, ¼ 5.57 4.13 7.03 5.83 5.3 4.77
Experiment 2: Sensory Evaluation- Overall Sensory Evaluation: All Three Trials Hedonic Scale (see key-in report) 10 8 6 4 2 0 All-, ¼, ½ Types of Flour Appearance Texture Flavor Discussion: In this experiment, there is a lot of data to take into consideration. When analyzing all three of the trials, the data that is provide above shows that everything is very similar. All of the numbers seem to be matching and lining up with the other numbers; in that each trial shows similar characteristics of each other. This is a good thing because it brings validity and more credibility toward the research done above. In experiment one, all three trials show very similar numbers. When testing the volume of the muffin, it is believed to help a lot that the batter was distributed very evenly in the wells of the muffin tin. Also following the recipe, step by step, very carefully helped also. When testing for the texture analyzer, there was trouble at first (when first measuring it- this data is not in the report) because different the texture analyzer was set on different setting and the fact that is was not clean (other students not taking care of it as well as they should) skewed my results at first. Problems like these can pop up in a lab like this because you are sharing equipment and machines with others and the environment is not at controlled as it should be. In experiment two, the sensory evaluation, the results came out fairly well. One issue that comes up with a survey about taste is that everyone is so different and it just takes one to sway the bell curve. This is one reason having three different trials helps; in that one can broaden the data with more people. Thirty people is still a small number to represent the population, but it is better than ten; and it allows us to get a better view of it. The volume of the muffin showed that the all-purpose had the most volume. This could mean that is water was more retained and the all-purpose flour caused the muffin to raise more during baking. The next highest volume was the ¾ all-purpose and ¼ chickpea. The chickpea flour had the least amount of volume; in that the muffin was very
dense. flour therefore does not act an emulsifier to help it grow and have more volume. The muffin also seemed not as moist and more dry and crumbly them the allpurpose flour (same goes for the other muffins that have a mix of the two; therefore, more chickpea- the drier, harder, less volume). The texture analyzer also showed that the more chickpea the muffin contained, the harder it was. When the texture analyzer s puncture probe went on the muffin, one could even see that more all-purpose flour muffin was softer and easier to puncture. is insoluble in water and this could definitely affect baking of these muffins because of the water that is being released. The next Experiment related to the Sensory Evaluation by groups of people. There were three different groups that got to sample the banana muffins and evaluate them. One group was a group of other Foods & Nutrition students and the other group was a group of randomly selected friends. The last group of ten was people who worked in Agricultural Administration Building. Some interesting information was gathered when asking people to sample and rate the banana muffins. The Foods & Nutrition students seemed to be able to guess which muffin was which; this was after they rated the muffins and they were told was the experiment was about. A gentleman in Ag Administration could immediately identify the chickpea flour without even being told what the types of muffins there were. This was due to his wife having to live a gluten free diet because of her celiac disease. Another man could not participate in the testing due to the fact that he has celiac disease. He did though get to enjoy one of the gluten-free muffins at the end. After the testing, the results were clear that people preferred the taste of the allpurpose flour than the chickpea flour. The next preference just went down from there; meaning the less and less all-purpose flour that was used, the less appetizing and flavorful the muffin became. This justifies the experiment; in that new ways to make food need to be discovered so that people like them (that must live gluten-free lifestyles) can live and eat as normal as possible. Plus they are able to enjoy the same foods that others are able to enjoy. (5) Celiac disease is more common than a lot of people think and the fact it does not have a cure just proves that people must work just as harder to coup with their gluten-free diets- and gluten-free (chickpea) muffins are just one of the many ways to go!
References: About-Health. Calories in Flour. About, Inc. The New York Times Company. 2003. <http://www.calorie-count.com/calories/item/16157.html>. Celiac Disease Foundation. Celiac Disease. Celiac Disease Foundation. 1998. <http://www.celiac.org/> Daniel R., James & Weaver M., Connie. The Food Chemistry Laborartory. CRC Press. 2003. Food Network. Flour. Scripps Networks, Inc. 2007 <http://www.recipezaar.com/library/getentry.zsp?id=64>. Harder, Ben. Target: Celiac Disease: Therapies aimed to complement or replace the gluten-free diet. Science News. 21 July, 2003. Vol. 163. <http://www2.lib.purdue.edu:2111/view/00368423/ap071396/07a00100/0?current Result=00368423%2bap071396%2b07a00100%2b0%2c07&searchUrl=http%3A %2F%2Fwww.jstor.org%2Fsearch%2FBasicResults%3Fhp%3D25%26si%3D1% 26gw%3Djtx%26jtxsi%3D1%26jcpsi%3D1%26artsi%3D1%26Query%3Dceliac %2Bdisease%26wc%3Don> NIDDK, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Celiac Disease. Clearinghouse. August 2007. <http://digestive.niddk.nih.gov/ddiseases/pubs/celiac/> Wikipedia. Gluten. Wikipedia- The Free Encyclopedia. 2005. Wikipedia. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/gluten>