Analysing texture acceptance scores presented in Table 2, it can be observed that the scores ranged from 4.9 (indifferent) to 7.5

(liked moderately). Table 2 shows that, in general, consumers indicated a good positive purchase intention (>36.4%). Although fibres did not interfere with these two sensory responses in part-baked breads, in conventional breads, wheat bran, resistant starch and LGB did interfere. As discussed for specific volume, the effect of the fibres was possibly masked by the effect of the freezing and frozen Selleck SAHA HDAC storage steps. Nevertheless, re-baked part-baked breads did not differ significantly (p < 0.05) with respect to texture acceptance from conventionally baked breads. Crumb moisture of re-baked breads after one, four and seven days from baking ranged from 44.01 to 48.80, from 36.70 to 46.59 and from 30.79 to 41.42 g/100 g flour, respectively. It was possible to obtain models which describe the behaviour of crumb moisture of loaves, selleck chemicals after one, four and seven days from baking, expressed in Eqs. (6), (7) and (8). The response surfaces for the three different days were very similar, with practically only a displacement along the Z axis (showing the reduction of crumb moisture content during storage) ( Fig. 3). Moisture content of breads was a reflex of the amount of

water added to the different formulations. Moister crumbs were obtained from doughs with higher farinographic water absorptions (wheat bran addition above 10 g/100 g and LBG above 1.5 g/100 g). This can be verified by the similarity between the response surfaces for moisture in this work and for farinographic water absorption

described in our previous Docetaxel work ( Almeida et al., 2010). On the three days evaluated, the higher the addition of wheat bran, the higher was the moisture content. However, the behaviour of crumb moisture as a function of the addition of resistant starch and LBG underwent changes during the evaluated period, showing that these fibres helped retain moisture. Initially, resistant starch did not have an interference in crumb moisture, but along the shelf-life the emergence of a region of retention of moisture in a range of combinations of resistant starch and LBG can be noted. On the fourth day, this region was located in concentrations of resistant starch between 1 and 16 g/100 g flour and LBG above 2.4 g/100 g flour. On the seventh day, this region becomes larger and extends to concentrations of LBG above 1.5 g/100 g flour. Resistant starch and LBG probably bound part of the water released in the starch retrogradation process ( Schiraldi & Fessas, 2001). LBG may also influence moisture retention by preventing self-association of amylose and amylopectin chains ( Ahmad & Williams, 2001). WB may not have been involved in this process as water was already sufficiently linked to its structure ( Almeida et al., 2013). equation(6) Crumbmoisture(Day1)=46.56+0.86WB+1.03LBG−0.45WBLBG(R2=0.