Bread: Dough Mixing and Testing Operations
S Tömösközi, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary
F Békés, FBFD PTY LTD, Sydney, NSW, Australia
ã 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Introduction
The fundamental basis of utilizing wheat flour as one of the most
important food source around the world is its unique property of
forming dough and developing gluten when it is mixed with
water. Wheat gluten is a protein–lipid–carbohydrate complex
formed as a result of specific covalent and noncovalent interac-
tions from flour components during dough making as the
components are hydrated and energy from mechanical input
from the mixing process is provided.
Wheat varieties at the same protein level were found to differ
in their bread-making quality, giving the first indication of pro-
tein quality. Protein content and its composition are important
determinants of good bread-baking quality. Gluten-forming pro-
teins contribute 80–85% of the total wheat protein and are the
major storage proteins of wheat. They belong to the prolamin
class of seed storage proteins. Gluten proteins are largely insolu-
ble in water or dilute salt solutions. Two functionally distinct
groups of gluten proteins can be distinguished: monomeric gli-
adins and polymeric (extractable and unextractable) glutenins.
Gliadins and glutenins are usually found in more or less equal
amounts in wheat. Large level of polymorphism of wheat pro-
lamins results in a special effect in relation to the overall func-
tional properties of wheat dough. During dough formation
when prolamin proteins are hydrated and form the gluten net-
work, the numerous structurally similar but slightly different
proteins produce a mass in which several characteristics (such
as size, polarity, charge distribution, solubility, and viscosity)
show a continuous distribution in a relatively large interval.
This structural feature provides a unique characteristic of gluten
proteins among any other protein systems.
Phases of Bread-Making Process
The bread-making process has several functions, accomplished
at different stages in the preparation and baking of dough: (a)
mixing of flour and water, together with yeast, salt, and other
ingredients in specified ratios to form the dough; (b) develop-
ing the gluten structure of hydrated proteins through applica-
tion of energy during mixing (a stage often termed ‘kneading’);
(c) incorporating air bubbles within the dough during mixing;
(d) continuing the development of the gluten structure after
kneading to improve its ability to expand when gas pressures
increase (a stage termed ‘ripening’ or ‘maturing’); (e) creating
or modifying flavor compounds in the dough; (f) subdividing
the dough mass into unit pieces; (g) modifying the shape of the
divided dough pieces; (h) resting to allow further modification
of the dough pieces’ physical and rheological properties; (i)
shaping to achieve required configuration; (j) proofing (fer-
menting and expanding) the dough; and (k) expanding and
fixing the dough into its final shape by baking.
490 Encyclopedia of Food and Health
Mixing and Dough Making
Dough mixing is a very important stage in the bread-making
process. The extent of mixing has a critical impact on final
bread quality. The mixing process promotes different physical,
chemical, and physicochemical modifications that contribute
to the dough development.
Chemical, Physical, and Physicochemical Alterations during
Dough Mixing Stages
Dough chemistry involves a series of interactions between
carbohydrates, lipids, and proteins. The principal physical
science involved with dough making is rheology (see in the
succeeding text). Good baking quality depends on several
rheological properties such as extensibility exceeding a mini-
mum level, viscosity, strain hardening, and optimal resistance
to deformation. Dough is viscoelastic, combining properties of
a Hookean solid with those of a non-Newtonian viscous fluid.
Dough is essentially foam, which becomes sponge after baking.
The transformation from the closed cell structure of a foam to
the open cells of a sponge is one of the many changes that
occur during dough processing.
Individual dough-property parameters describe only certain
essential elements of dough properties. Depending on the final
product, different levels of these attributes are required to get
superior processing quality. For example, the balance of dough
strength and extensibility is believed to be the most important
factor governing the suitability of a flour to make good bread.
However, for different types of breads and even for different
types of processing technologies, a diversity of dough strength
and extensibility values may provide the optimum balances
needed in each case.
The complexity of relating protein composition to quality
derives from the fact that the question can (and has to) be
investigated on different levels of protein composition,
namely, protein content, the ratio of polymeric proteins to
monomeric proteins, the ratio of high-molecular-weight
(HMW) glutenin subunits to low-molecular-weight glutenin
subunits, and the proportions of x-type and y-type HMW glu-
tenin subunits. These various parameters can be determined
for a specific flour sample to see if there is a ‘good balance’
between the various components in the sample, thereby to
satisfy quality-related criteria. The polymeric glutenin is mostly
responsible for the elasticity of the dough, whereas the mono-
meric gliadins are the extensibility-related characters in the
system. Thus, the ratio of polymeric proteins to monomeric
proteins (the glutenin-to-gliadin ratio) can be directly related
to the balance of dough strength and extensibility of the
sample.
Two preconditions must be met for the production of
dough with the right properties: (a) appropriate proportioning
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-384947-2.00086-6

of the individual ingredients as established in a well-balanced
dough formulation and (b) homogenous distribution of these
ingredients throughout the dough mass. In its essentials, dough
mixing involves the combining and blending of the formula
ingredients and then applying sufficient physical work to the
mixture to transform it into a cohesive mass with the requisite
viscoelastic properties. In large-scale commercial bakery produc-
tion, the major ingredients (flour and dry sweeteners) are nor-
mally weighed by automatic scales that feed directly into the
mixers, while water, liquid shortener, and liquid sweeteners are
piped into the mixer through meters that can be preset to deliver
specified volumes.
In addition to achieving a thorough dispersion of the ingre-
dients into a homogeneous mixture, the dough mixing process
in bread making has the further important objective of physi-
cally developing the gluten proteins into a coherent three-
dimensional structure that will impart to the dough the desired
degree of plasticity, elasticity, and viscosity. The initial mixing
phase must physically hydrate the flour particles and incorpo-
rate air to nucleate gas cells responsible for leavening. In other
words, mixing has three functions: (a) creating a homogenous
mass from ingredients of differing characteristics, (b) develop-
ing (kneading) the dough sufficiently to ready for subsequent
processing, and (c) occluding air into the mass to form the cell
structure necessary for finished crumb quality.
At the beginning of the mixing, blending action leads to an
even distribution of the dough ingredients and ensures hydra-
tion and swelling of flour particles. Wheat flour dough or
batter may appear to be uniform and well mixed, but actually,
it is multiphasic: starch, gluten proteins, lipids, and water
representing the principal phases. Furthermore, the form of
these phases changes during periods of mixing that prepare
them for separation or food uses. Microscopic changes begin
with the instant formation of protein fibrils at first contact of
water and flour particles. Slow mechanical development
induces these fibrils to coalesce into fibrous bands or tendons
and segregates the starch into clusters. When flooded with a
displacing fluid, this open, spongelike structure readily releases
the entrained starch. Additional development disbands the
protein into relatively fine, uniformly distributed, and net-
worked or webbed filaments that entrap the starch and gas
bubbles formed when the dough is fermented and baked.
The physical properties of hydrated wheat proteins are the result
of covalent and noncovalent interactions of wheat gluten pro-
teins. These interactions are altered by the repeated extension,
tearing, and compression during mixing or development.
Specific chemical effects include (1) disulfide bond disruption,
(2) chain disentanglement and rupture, (3) disulfide–sulfhydryl
interchange, (4) formation of dityrosine cross-links, (5) forma-
tion of new disulfide cross-links, (6) free radical interactions, and
especially (6) reorientation leading to enhanced hydrogen
bonding.
Mixing produces a homogeneous gluten film regularly dis-
tributed around the starch granules. The dough must be mixed
for a specific time (referred to as optimum dough develop-
ment) to ensure optimal loaf volume and bread texture. Stop-
ping mixing before the optimal point results in undermixed
dough that gives bread of inferior volume and crumb quality.
The optimal mixing requirement is a specific characteristic of
each wheat flour. Beyond optimum dough development time,
Bread: Dough Mixing and Testing Operations 491
overmixing induces dough stickiness, decreases dough consis-
tency (due to degradation by shearing effects), and negatively
affects bread quality.
Stability of the gluten–starch matrix – the primary stabiliz-
ing factor for expanding gas cells against disproportionateness
and coalescence – depends on its tendency to strain harden.
The phenomenon of strain hardening appears to depend on
the balance between strength and extensibility of the entangled
network of polymeric proteins of wheat flour. Extensibility
ensures slippage of the maximum number of statistical
segments between entanglements, whereas strength prevents
disruption of the entangled network of polymeric proteins.
Thus, to ensure stability of gas cells, the dough needs to be
not only sufficiently extensible to respond to gas pressure but
also strong enough to resist collapse.
A good gas-holding capacity of dough is necessary for pro-
ducing a loaf of bread with light and even crumb. The strain
hardening properties of gluten are vital to avoid early rupture of
gas ‘cell wall’ during proofing. The gas phase of bread, which
makes up more than 70% of the final volume of a loaf, has a
major influence on its textural and sensory attributes. Control-
ling the gas phase volume is a major challenge as during proving
and early stages of baking gas must be captured within bread
dough, only being released at the end of baking. The main
factors, important in determining the gas cell structure, include
(1) the formation of the initial foam structure during mixing
and (2) stabilization of the foam structure, including those
factors governing bubble disproportionateness and coalescence.
There is particular focus on the role that the thin film lining the
bubbles may play in stabilizing the foam structure of a risen
dough. The surface properties of components have been sug-
gested to be the important factor to the stability of gas cells.
Recently, proteomic methods have been used to identify
foam-forming soluble proteins from dough that may play an
important role in stabilizing gas bubbles in dough and hence
influence the crumb structure of bread. Proteins from a soluble
fraction of dough (dough liquor) or dough liquor foam
have been separated and identified. Major polypeptide compo-
nents included b-amylase, tricitin, and serpins, with members of
the a-amylase/trypsin inhibitor family being particularly abun-
dant. Neither prolamin seed storage proteins nor the surface-
active protein puroindoline was found.
Differences in gluten quality can significantly affect the
bread-making potential. Strength is conferred by the fraction
of polymeric proteins having molecular weight greater or
equivalent to a critical size, MT, (250 000 kDa), and the frac-
tion of gluten protein smaller than MT may counter the
strength by acting as diluents. The optimum balance seems to
exist when the relative proportions of polymeric proteins
greater and smaller than MT are roughly 60:40. Shift in the
balance to either side will decrease loaf volume. Increase in
smaller proteins (less than MT) may decrease stability of the
gluten–starch matrix due to a lesser number of entanglements
per chain. On the other hand, increase in strength conferring
proteins may prevent sufficient expansion of the gluten–starch
matrix required to increase loaf volume due to reduced slip-
page of gluten polymers through entanglement nodes as a
result of increase in number of entanglements per chain. The
secondary stabilizing mechanism involves thin liquid lamellae
stabilized by adsorbed surface-active compounds (lipids and
492 Bread: Dough Mixing and Testing Operations

proteins) at the gas–liquid interface. Liquid lamellae prevent
coalescence and disproportionateness of gas cells when they
come in close contact with each other during the late proving
and early baking stages of bread making, that is, when discon-
tinuities begin to appear in the gluten–starch matrix. Flour
lipids at their natural levels do not influence rheological prop-
erties of the gluten–starch matrix surrounding the gas cells, as
measured by the dough inflation system. Nevertheless, the
small amounts in which these lipids are naturally present are
sufficient to influence surface properties.
This short and simplified description of well-accepted
observation-based hypothesis of dough behavior underlines
the essential importance of size distribution of gluten proteins
in relation to their role in determining dough properties. As a
consequence of this, a combination of reducing agents,
oxidizers, and proteolytic enzymes is frequently used in the
baking process to alter dough properties through their effects
on the disulfide bonds in the gluten structure. Functional
additives play a big role in modern bread making. Among the
improvers, ascorbic acid is the most important in modern
bread formulation to oxidize flour proteins to improve gluten
strength. Other such ingredients (and their functions) include
azodicarbonamide (oxidizing agent), cysteine (reducing
agent), mono- and diglycerides (emulsifiers and antistaling
agents), calcium propionate (mold inhibitor), stearoyl lacty-
late (dough strengthener), soy flour (crumb whitener),
dextrose (fermentable sugar source for the yeast), ammonium
chloride (nitrogen source for yeast), enzymes (starch and pro-
tein adjustment), and, occasionally, gluten (strengthener).
Dough Preparation Systems
No single standard method for mixing ingredients to create
dough is followed by all bakers; instead, more than a half-
dozen different procedures can be used. The detailed characteri-
zation of these methods is shown in Table 1. Baker preference,
product type, and plant practice determine the choice of
method. Preparation of the dough can be done in batches or
continuously, and fermentation times vary from none to several
hours.
Today, most commercial bakers prepare dough as separate
batches, sized sufficiently to permit an uninterrupted produc-
tion schedule but not too large to risk overaging the dough as it
waits in the divider hopper. The continuous mix method was
developed during the 1950s to automate dough preparation.
At one time, it was used by the majority of bakeries producing
white pan bread, but this method fell out of favor when con-
sumer demand for variety bread increased starting in the late
1970s. Technologies that grew up around continuous mix such
as water brews and liquid sponge, however, remain in wide use
for lines dedicated to baking long runs of fast-food buns and
similar products.

Table 1 Overview of the most generally used dough preparation systems

Dough system Bread and related product produces Advantages Disadvantages

Straight dough Lean formula hearth bread, pita bread, Good flavor
100% whole wheat Medium process time
Good mixing tolerance
Sponge and dough Sponge and dough bread and rolls Good fermentation tolerance
Superior product score
Good dough handling
Longer product shelf life
Liquid sponge Sponge and dough bread and rolls Uniformity of product
Medium process time
Good flavor with high amount of flour
in the sponge
Continuous mix White pan bread, hamburger/hotdog buns Same advantages as liquid sponge if
fermented
Less equipment, labor, and space
used
No-time dough Frozen dough, bagels, hard rolls, Short production time
pizza crusts, dinner rolls, Greater flexibility
variety pan bread, English muffins Less equipment and space
Superior yeast survival in freezing
Chorleywood Hamburger/hotdog buns, variety pan Tolerant to low-protein flours
process bread, rye bread
Short production time
Greater flexibility
No floor time problems
Authentic sourdough Authentic sourdough breads and buns Sourdough flavor
process Increased shelf life
‘Blistered’ appearance
Chewy, resilient texture
Difficult dough handling
Long mixing time
Poor fermentation tolerance
Poor mixing tolerance
Long process time
High-cost equipment
Larger space equipment
High-cost equipment
Limited to 50–60% of flour in sponge
Lack of flavor and shelf life with low
flour in sponge
Limited to 50–60% of flour in sponge
Lack of crumb strength
Lack of flavor and shelf life with less
fermentation
Lack of flavor
Lack of shelf life
Higher ingredient costs
Problem with floor time
High equipment cost
High energy cost
Lack of flavor
Lack of product shelf life
Very long process times
Nurturing of sponge
Less consistency
Increased space requirement

Source: O’Donell (1996).


Among mixing methods being practiced commercially, the
most prevalent is the sponge-and-dough process that involves
two mixing stages, namely, one of the sponge and the other of
the dough. The sponge mixing stage aims at homogeneous
ingredient dispersion and flour hydration and is normally of
relatively brief duration, whereas the more critical phase of
dough development is reserved for the more extensive mixing
of the final dough. In the straight-dough method, as well as in
those systems that employ various forms of liquid preferment,
there is but one mixing stage in which complete dough devel-
opment must be achieved.
White pan bread is highly standardized, has well-
recognized quality characteristics, and represents the main
product style in many parts of the world. Some countries,
notably France, take the baguette as the standard product.
Table 1 shows the advantages and limitations of the most
important methodologies based on the excellent review of
Mihalos.
Testing Operations
Introduction
Dough testing methodologies are essential tools through the
whole wheat chain from basic research, prebreeding, selection
for quality attributes during breeding, characterizing source
material, quality control, process, and product development
in the wheat-based food industry.
Testing operations can be classified as direct dough testing
methods and indirect methods where dough properties are
estimated from chemical, physicochemical (spectral), or phys-
ical (sedimentation) characteristics. Dough properties, directly
related to the bread-making quality of the sample, describe
certain viscosimetric or rheological properties of the dough,
so the dough testing investigations apply viscosimetric and
rheological principles. In general, viscosimetric methods
show strong relationships to the starch composition of the
samples, while the rheological properties are directly related
to both qualitative and quantitative aspects of gluten protein
composition.
Some basic information on the direct dough testing
methods is given here, with special emphases on the
small-scale and microscale testing methods, which revolutioni-
zed our understanding about structure–function relationships
in wheat dough in the last 30 years. Only some key references
are given about the principles, solutions, and achievements of
indirect methods in the paragraphs summarizing future trends
in the area.
Basic and Empirical Rheology
Rheology is the science of the deformation and flow of mate-
rials as a response to physical stresses. The deformation can be
classified as elastic or inelastic, while the flow properties
of a material can be described as plastic or viscous behavior.
Ideal elastic bodies undergo reversible elastic strain when
anisotropic forces are applied. In this case, the applied energy
is partly stored. In case of ideal viscous body, irreversible
changes can be observed, where the exerted energy is
Bread: Dough Mixing and Testing Operations 493
transformed. Viscous fluids generally exhibit viscosity, while
solids exhibit elasticity.
The aim of fundamental rheology is trying to describe and
model the physical behavior of materials by studying the rela-
tionships between molecular composition and the observed
deformation. Widely applicable instruments (viscometers, rhe-
ometers, etc.) and/or specific, often purpose-built methods are
used for this purpose. The resulting information, however –
despite its scientific merit – does not satisfy the demands
dictated by the practice: Fundamental rheology methods
often do not differentiate enough among samples and, most
importantly, they are not suitable for high-throughput, reason-
ably cheap routine application in selecting for quality in plant
breeding or in case of quality control in the food industry.
During the first quarter of the last century, several empirical
rheological equipments and methodologies have been devel-
oped, and the last 100 years proved that these standardized
methodologies can be applied fruitfully for the comparison/
rating of samples derived from the breeding or industrial oper-
ations. The collected/archived data derived from these analyses
form an invaluable knowledge base based on which the new
wheat cultivars and new wheat products of the future can be
developed.
Traditional empiric rheological methods and instruments
As it was mentioned earlier, when wheat flour, water, and other
related ingredients are mixed, the whole system undergoes a
number of chemical reactions and physicochemical and physi-
cal changes during dough formation. The type and the rate of
these changes highly depend on the composition of wheat flour,
on the ingredients, and on the parameters of dough mixing like
length mixing, energy input, and temperature. Molecular pro-
cesses related to the aforementioned changes can be monitored
by the continuous measurement of physical (rheological) prop-
erties of dough from the starting stage of homogenization
through the formation of protein–carbohydrate–lipid–water
complex (gluten) until its certain break caused by overmixing.
Wheat dough has both elastic and flowing properties;
therefore, it shows a complex viscoelastic behavior. Therefore,
the main challenge in the development of empiric rheological
methods and instruments has been how one can apply ade-
quate external forces on the dough to measure both elastic
strain and viscous flow in one system.
Two principally different empiric rheological methodolo-
gies have been developed: mixing methods to monitor dough
formation and stretching methods for the determination of
dough strength and extensibility. In case of the latter process,
dough is mixed to its optimum consistency in a separate pro-
cess followed by a relaxation step before stretching. So, the two
methods together mimic the industrial bread-making technol-
ogy with one important exception: instead of a full formula-
tion of the dough, including yeast, dough is mixed here with
either water or salt solution.
Mixing methods: The traditional simple solution for detect-
ing the physical changes in a dough is the utilization of
standardized (laboratory) mixers with the recording of torque
on the mixing arm(s) and/or bowl. The first recording labora-
tory mixers – regarded as the forerunners of the first commer-
cial machines developed later on, the Swanson–Working
494 Bread: Dough Mixing and Testing Operations

mixograph and Brabender farinograph – have been developed
by the Hungarian inventor Jenő Hankóczy.
The working principle of the farinograph is to monitor the
torque (energy requirement) during the continuous but
relatively gentle mixing of wheat flour – added water system
at constant speed and temperature (at 30  C). The sigmoid (or
Z-type) shape of the mixing blades is very unique, which is able
to knead and extend the dough, periodically. The torque that
arises from dough resistance against mixing was originally
measured using a special balance system and replaced later
with electronic recording systems. Basically, dough resistance,
detected in this equipment, is determined by the rheological
properties of dough, particularly viscosity, but the surface
properties of the dough, sticking to the bowl walls and blades,
also contribute to the measured values. The comparability of
different dough behaviors (or flour quality) is ensured with the
standardization of maximum dough resistance.
Beyond the mixing parameters such as mixing speed and
resistance measured with this system, there is the function of
the flour behavior and the amount of water added to the flour.
The huge success of the farinograph spreading all around the
wheat chain as early as the 1930s derived from the idea of using
this direct relationship between the amount of water in
the system and resistance for the determination of the most
important quality attribute of the flour, water absorption, which
is the amount of water needed to be added to the flour to reach
the constant consistence (500 or 600 farinograph or Brabender
units, BU) of dough.
The routine investigation on the farinograph is a two-step
process: water absorption of the flour is determined through a
‘titration-like’ process, followed by the main mixing experi-
ment using this amount of water to characterize the rheological
properties of the dough such as dough development time,
stability, and degree of softening (Figure 1). The detailed
description of the farinograph method including the evalua-
tion of curves is summarized in different standard methods
(ICC, AACCI, ISO, etc.).
The second traditional type of recording dough mixer is the
mixograph. The main difference between these two mixers is
the mixing action. The mixograph equipped with pin mixers,
where a pull–fold–repull type of movement is applied causing
much greater mechanical stress on dough than that in the
farinograph or other Z-arm-type mixers.
In case of mixing with mixograph, there is no predeter-
mined optimum consistency of dough; therefore, other
methods have to be used for measuring the optimal water
absorption. Two methods are used in practice: (a) Samples
are compared with a uniform amount of water added and

375 375 375

350 350 350

325 325 325

300 300 300

1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0

Arrival Departure
time time
600

500
Mixing
Tolerance
Brabender unit (BU)

Index
400
Stability

300

200
Peak
time
100
Peak time
+ 5 min
0
0 4 8 12 16
Time (min)
Figure 1 Important farinograph parameters.
 Bread: Dough Mixing and Testing Operations 495

(b) the water used in the mixing experiments is calculated
based on the protein content of the investigated flours. The
parameters generally determined by the evaluation of the
recorded mixogram (Figure 2) are as follows: peak time (sim-
ilarly to the dough development time), maximum peak height,
the height of the curve at a specified time after peak (characteri-
zing the tolerance against overmixing, similarly to the farino-
graphic stability), the angle between the ascending and
descending portions of the curve (tolerance angle, T ), the
weakening angle (W), and the area under the curve are defined.
High-speed recordings obtained with a 35 g mixograph
equipped with a strain gage allowed the high-resolution mon-
itoring of the mixing action. These recordings provided data
essential for developing a mathematical model of dough mix-
ing: dough mixing on pin mixers can be interpreted as a
complex, periodic series of pushing and stretching the dough
around the pins. Each individual peak represents one of
these circles, and so, their size and shape are characteristic to
the stage of dough development, and they can be used to
determine dough strength and elasticity of the dough (details
(a), (b), and (c) of Figure 2 illustrate three regions of the high-
resolution mixing curve ((a), (b), and (c)), illustrating the
hydration, dough development, and overmixing phases of
the mixing). Bandwidth parameters (BWPR, BWBD, and
TMBW), directly related to elasticity, in the mathematical
model are also shown.
Some other instruments developed by different producers
(valorigraph, doughLAB, etc.) work on the same or similar
principle as described earlier, with different sizes of mixing
bowls and arms for mixing 10–300 g of flour.
Stretching methods: Elasticity is the most unique property of
wheat dough, and it mostly depends on the protein–wheat
gluten composition and quality. Extensibility of wheat dough
is responsible for the extent of expansion during leavening;
therefore, it basically determines the baking performance and
the quality of final products. In all stretching tests, to determine
extensibility, the dough produced by one of the standardized
mixing methods is then submitted to large deformations until
rupture occurs and the resistance against stretching strain is
recorded.
Two types of extension methods are used: in uniaxial exten-
sion test, the dough is stretched in one direction, while in case of
biaxial method, the dough is extended in two opposing direc-
tion. The most traditional and commonly used equipment is the
Brabender Extensograph, introduced in 1936. The operation of
this instrument is based on the principle of mechanical stretch-
ing in simple tension. The investigated dough samples are pre-
pared in the farinograph mixer with optimum water absorption,
and then, aliquot pieces of the dough are molded with special
tools. During the measurement, the resistance of formed dough
pieces to stretching and the distance the dough stretches before
breaking are recorded on the extensogram (Figure 3). The fol-
lowing parameters are determined/calculated: the maximum
resistance (Rmax), the resistance at a constant extension (gener-
ally at 50 mm, Rx), extensibility (the maximum length of exten-
sion before rupture, E), the ratio of maximum resistance to
extension (as an indicator of the balance between elastic and
viscous behaviors, Rmax/E), and the area under the curve (as
extensional work, A). In some cases, the applied methods can
differ in some parameters, like constant extension and resting
time of dough before measurement. The desired quality of
dough means a good combination of dough resistance and
extensibility.
The first device for measuring the biaxial extension charac-
ter of wheat dough was also developed by Hankóczy, while the
principle of dough inflation test was developed by Marcel

MT b

RBD
BWPR
Resistance

c
a BWBD

PR

0 200 400 600 800

TMBW MBW

a - Hydration b – Dough development c – Dough overmixing

Figure 2 The most important parameters determined from the mixograph curve. MT, mixing time; PR, peak resistance; RBD, resistance
breakdown; BWPR, bandwidth at peak; MBW, maximum bandwidth; TMBW, time to maximum bandwidth. High-resolution data recording of regions
a, b, and c show the stages of hydration, dough development, and overmixing, respectively.
496 Bread: Dough Mixing and Testing Operations

EU Maximum Resistance (Rmax)

Resistance

5 cm
Energy (cm2)

mm
Extensibility
Figure 3 The determination of dough strength (Rmax) and extensibility from the extensograph curve (extensogram).

Dough tenacity

Deformation energy W

Dough extensibility L
Figure 4 The determination of dough tenacity (P), configuration ratio(P/L), and deformation energy (W) and from the alveograph curve (alveogram).

Chopin in 1927. Today, the most widely known and standardi-
zed biaxial extension test is the alveograph method, which is
based on the principle of dough inflation or bubble expansion
technique. This procedure mimics the microprocesses occur-
ring in dough during fermentation in macroscale, namely, the
formation of thin membranes around the CO2 bubbles. The
Chopin Alveograph consists of a special thermostated, one-
screw mixer for mixing and extrusion of dough, a bubble
blowing apparatus, and the recording manometer. During the
measuring procedure, dough disks are prepared, rested, and
then inflated by constant air flow. The pressure inside the
dough bubble until rupture is measured and recorded on the
alveogram (Figure 4). The most generally read or calculated
parameters are the maximum overpressure (an indicator of the
dough tenacity, P), the average abscissa at rupture (characteri-
zes the extensibility, L), configuration ratio (P/L), and the area
under the curve (as deformation energy, W).
The extension tests are also used for investigating the effects
of natural or artificial modifying agents, like bugs, enzymes,
oxidants or reducing components, and lubricants. The results,
recorded curves, and determined parameters of the two
methods are very similar. However, because of the different
mixing procedures and measuring principle, the comparability
of the results is limited and depends also on the type and
variety of the samples.
Viscometry as a tool for investigation of the hot phase
of the bread-making process
The conventional dough rheology is mainly connected to the
protein-dependent dough properties in the first, not heated
phase of bread making. Starch as the main component of
wheat flour also affects the quality-related properties, even
the rheological properties of the dough, mostly as diluent of
the proteins and as a consequence of altered hydration during
gelatinization in the oven.
Additionally, starch is exposed to enzymatic breakdown,
depending on the a-amylase activity of the flour and physical
braking during the milling process resulting in damaged starch.
An optimal level of enzymatic activity and amount of damaged
starch are necessary for the optimal fermentation processes
in baking. However, high enzyme activity or a high ratio of
hydrolyzed starch results in a weaker water-holding capacity,
resulting in serious drop in the end-product quality. Therefore,
starch-related viscosity-based characterization of samples is an
essential part of source material quality control in the baking
industry, and the balanced amylolytic activity is part of the
selection criteria during breeding.
Starch properties are usually studied at high temperatures –
similar to conditions of the baking process. Generally, the
starch characterization is performed by different viscometers,
carrying out measurements on temperatures appearing in
the technology. The most frequently used standardized
method for investigation of a-amylase activity of the grain/
flour is the determination of falling number on a special falling
viscometer.
While the falling number is a one-point measurement,
rotational viscometers are suitable for continuous measures
and therefore for more complex characterization of pasting
properties of cereal flours and also isolated and modified
starch products. The viscometers are heated with constant heat-
ing rate, or protocols with optional heating programs are
applied depending on the sample types and the goals of mea-
surement. In the first case, Brabender Amylograph® or similar
apparatuses are used, and at the beginning of gelatinization
( C), maximum viscosity value and gelatinization temperature
( C) are determined from the registered viscosity curves

according to international standards. In case of instruments
working with programmable heating rates (e.g., Rapid Visco
Analyser® (RVA), by Perten Instruments, or Micro Visco-
Amylo-Graph® by Brabender GmbH), the pasting properties
are followed continuously during heat increasing, constant
heating, and heat decreasing periods. Next to the already
mentioned parameters, viscosity breakdown during cooling,
holding strength, and final viscosity are determined. The inter-
pretation of the measured parameters is shown in Figure 5.
These partly standardized methods allow to characterize the
effects of enzymes and the hydration and viscosity develop-
ment of hydrocolloids, predicting the quality of starch–protein
matrices after cooling (i.e., bread crumb quality), and are
applied on much wider areas than the characterization of
wheat quality. The applied conditions model better the
bread-baking processes in hot phases, but in all cases, the
pasting properties are measured in dilute flow-water suspen-
sion. Therefore, the adaptation of the measured parameters to
the real dough/bread system is not unambiguous.
Investigation of dough fermentation and real baking process
Simplified dough rheometers serve very useful parameters, but
their applicability for prediction of baking quality is limited
mainly because the fermentation processes, the presence and
distribution of the gas (CO2) phase, and the heating effects
significantly modify the rheological behavior of the dough
system.
The frequently used laboratory test for overall characteri-
zation of baking quality of wheat flour is the baking test. It is
‘the ultimate’ method, being the real baking process, simulat-
ing the industrial conditions in laboratory environment.
However, these trials are time-consuming and labor-intensive,
and the interpretation of measured parameters (volume,
sensory, and texture properties) is partly subjective. Because
of some critical phases of fermented dough processing
(like proofing and heating), continuous and better reproduc-
ible measurements are required. The Rheofermentometer
(Chopin Technologies) is suitable for measuring the dough
development and tolerance, the intensity of gas production,
and the rate of gas retention. The similar but more complex
Maturograph® combined with Oven Rise Recorder (Brabender
Pasting
Peak viscosity
temperature
Breakdown
Viscosity
Holding strength
Time
Figure 5 Characterization of the states of starch with rotational viscometers.
Bread: Dough Mixing and Testing Operations 497
GmbH) is able to measure the proving and baking quality of
dough, including the changes of elasticity during the whole
process.
Small-scale and microscale testing
The development of very small-scale dough testing equipment
and the associated automated interpretation of the resulting
mixing curves has provided better reproducibility and removed
operator bias, resulting in more objective assessment of the
experimental variables. Several small-scale mixographs have
been developed and used in different laboratories requiring 2
and 10 g of flour. The 2 g mixograph test procedure was orig-
inally designed to mimic the traditional scale methods: devel-
opment of equipment and procedures included validation
against the large-scale standard methods. A 10 g mixing bowl
farinograph has been available since the early 1980s, while
its 4 g analogous machine has been developed and its com-
mercially available version, the micro-doughLAB, recently
produced by Perten. Similar scaling-down processes have hap-
pened also in relation to the extension measurements, devel-
oping a prototype of microextension tester or the Kiefer-rig and
the microdough inflation system for the TA-XT2 Texture Analy-
zer (Stable Micro Systems). The microextension tester has
proved practical to use dough from the 2 g mixograph with
micro baking facilities scaled to employ 2.4 g of dough per
loaf. The traditional and small-scale dough testing methods
have been found to be highly related. Essential member of the
microscale machinery is the METEFEM Laboratory micro mill
for supplying flour for the micro methodology. This mill is
able to make flour even from one single grain and provides
milling yield results from 20 g of grain, comparable to those
from traditional milling tests.
Beyond applying the microscale and small-scale methodol-
ogy in breeding for selection to quality in much earlier stages,
these developments have facilitated a wide range of research in
which either only limited amounts of test material have been
available or the more objective, precise assessment of data
offered extra benefits.
The spin-off of the developments of small-scale dough
testing methodology has been that parallel with the develop-
ment of small-scale machinery, the electronic data handling
Final viscosity
Re-association
of molecules
(retrogradation)
Temperature
Setback
Complete
dispersion
Temperature
profile
498 Bread: Dough Mixing and Testing Operations
and processing and the specific software for calculating the
mixing parameters and/or their analogous versions have been
adapted for the traditional instruments; even, ‘mobile’ PC-
based versions have been made to attach them onto industrial
mixers.
New Developments
Modern bakeries employ high-energy and low-temperature
mixing in the production of raw and frozen dough products.
However, batch variation in mixed dough quality remains
a problem. Traditional instruments used to study the mixing
characteristics of doughs were unable to mimic this
low-temperature mixing process. The doughLAB and the Mixo-
lab equipments have the capabilities to alter thermal and
mechanical energy inputs during mixing.
As it was mentioned earlier, different mixing procedures
(straight, continuous, high-speed mixing, etc.) are applied in
the baking industry. The amount and the intensity of energy
input also affect the rheological properties of dough and so the
final quality of baking products. In the case of the mentioned
methods and instruments, constant mixing speeds are used.
The recently developed doughLAB® (Perten Instruments) is a
flexible recording rheometer, which can be used with both
conventional z-arm and high-speed mixing actions. The latest
one is able to emulate the high rates of mechanical energy
input, applied in modern rapid baking systems.
A newly developed small-scale and rapid instrument is the
GlutoPeak (Brabender GmbH), where a high-speed mixing
action is applied in a thermostated flour–water slurry. The
gluten proteins are separated and aggregated by the high-
speed sharing effects; the gluten network is formed resulting
to an increase in the measured torque. Further intensive mixing
destroys the gluten structure; therefore, the resistance of the
3,5
WA
3
C1, T1
Resistance (NM)
2,5
T°C1
2 γ
1,5
1 C4, T4
α
0,5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
Figure 6 Mixolab parameters to characterize the mixing and heating/cooling related attributes of the dough.
dough against mixing is decreasing. The time to maximum
resistance and the value of peak maximum are the two most
informative parameters, determined from the recorded Gluto-
Peak diagrams.
The Mixolab System (Chopin Technologies) monitors the
resistance of a dough during the dough formation phase and
then through a heating/cooling/heating process (Figure 6) in a
spiral mixer, mimicking the whole bread-making process.
Phase 1 of the curve is equivalent to that of the farinograph,
while information derived from phases 2–5 is similar to those
of RVA. So, the Mixolab System enables the determination of
the contribution of both protein and starch components of the
dough in its rheological properties in a single test. Therefore, it
is able to perform continuous measurement throughout a
simulated baking process, which means that one can use the
same instrument for several applications.
Trends and Future
Recent achievements in fundamental rheology to develop new
rheological tests applying the knowledge base of modern poly-
mer rheology principles such as the measurement of extensional
strain hardening provide the basis to future developments of
novel, practical equipments and methodology, suitable for rou-
tine evaluation of wheat-based end products.
Cumulative demand of the consumer for healthier, more
nutritive bread is a challenge in the whole wheat chain: new
quality attributes have to be considered and monitored. The
best example for this trend is the effects of applying whole
wheat meal and/or ingredients with higher fiber content as
source materials. Besides their direct involvement in the devel-
opment of protein–carbohydrate–lipid complex, altered fiber
content alters drastically the water intake of the flour, changing
Bowl temperature
Dough temperature
C5, T5
T°C5
C3, T3
Temperature (°C)
T°C3
β
T°C4
C2, T2
T°C2
Time (min)

the usual hydration process and therefore altering the physical
and physicochemical conditions during dough mixing.
With the appearance of wheats with much more variation
in starch composition (waxy wheat and high-amylase wheat),
starch-related quality evaluation, largely using viscosimetric
techniques, will get significantly more emphases in quality
evaluation.
Similarly to milling, where the application of NIR tech-
nique to monitor the composition of source material and end
products is widespread, there is a strengthening trend to utilize
the advantages of spectroscopic analytic and monitoring tech-
niques also in the baking industry, especially continuously
monitoring the process of dough development in the mixer.
The NIR technology has the potential to provide an invasive or
noninvasive mean of probing chemical changes that occur
during dough development because the absorbances in the
spectra can be directly related to the chemical dough compo-
nents (water, starch, protein, and fat).
Further spread of the application of indirect, high-
throughput relatively cheap methods is expected in the future
in prebreeding and breeding, applying small and micro
methods such as the Micro Zeleny Tester, NIR, and Raman
spectrophotometric techniques to estimate quality attributes
and methods predicting important dough properties such as
dough strength and extensibility or water absorption based on
the genetic and chemical composition of the flour.
In the breeding process to select for quality, the application
of traditional dough testing methodologies (farinograph and
extensograph) will be the key process also in the future, because
of the archived, invaluable data of previous generations of
breeding material, determined on these equipments for decades.
It is therefore essential to fully understand and characterize the
relationships between quality attributes determined by means of
traditional methods and those derived from new generation test
equipments applied by the industry for process and product
development and quality control.
Breeding and industrial objectives are aimed to be achieved
through monitoring end-product quality rather than a set of
dough parameters – a trend, appearing in the last decade that
will fundamentally alter the quality control in the future. A
recently developed equipment extensively used already in both
basic research and developmental activities is the C-cell digital
image analysis for the objective investigation of crumb struc-
ture of bread loaves, providing incomparably more insight
about bread-making quality than traditional baking test deter-
mining loaf volume.
See also: Bread: Breadmaking Processes; Bread: Chemistry of Baking;
Bread: Types of Bread; Cakes: Types of Cakes; Cereals: Types and
Composition; Food Fraud; Pasta: Manufacture and Composition;
Rheological Properties of Food Materials; Starch: Structure, Property,
and Determination; Wheat: Grain Structure of Wheat and Wheat-based
Products; Wheat: The Crop.
Bread: Dough Mixing and Testing Operations 499
Further Reading
Anderssen RS, Gras PW, and MacRitchie F (1996) Modelling the mixing of wheat flour
dough. In: Wrigley CW (ed.) Gluten 96. Proceedings of 6th international gluten
workshop, pp. 249–252. Melbourne, Australia: RACI.
Békés F (2012) New aspects in quality related wheat research (Review, I and II). Cereal
Research Communications 40: 159–184, pp. 307–333.
Békés F, Lukow O, Uthayakumaran S, and Mann G (2000) Small-scale dough testing
methods. In: Shewry PR and Lookhart G (eds.) Wheat gluten protein analysis,
pp. 173–198. St Paul, MN: AACC.
Cauvain SP (1998) Breadmaking processes. In: Cauvin SP and Young LS (eds.)
Technology of breadmaking, pp. 18–44. London: Blackie.
Cornish GB, Békés F, Eagles HA, and Payne PI (2006) Prediction of dough properties
for bread wheats. In: Wrigley CW, Békés F, and Bushuk W (eds.) Gliadin and
glutenin. Chapter 8. The unique balance of wheat quality, pp. 243–280. St Paul,
MN: AACCI Press.
Dobraszczyk BJ and Morgenstern MP (2003) Rheology and the breadmaking process.
Journal of Cereal Science 38: 229–245.
Gorton LA (2009) Fundamental bakery dough processes. In: Pyler EJ and Gorton LA
(eds.) Baking science and technology, vol. 2; 4th ed., pp. 1–136. Kansas City, MO:
Sosland, Chapter 6.
Gras PW, Anderssen RS, Keentok M, Békés F, and Appels R (2001) Gluten protein
functionality in wheat flour processing. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research
52: 1311–1323.
Hadnadev DT, Pojic M, Hadnađev M, and Torbica A (2011) The role of empirical
rheology in flour quality control. In: Akyar I (ed.) Wide spectra of quality control,
pp. 335–360. New York: InTech, Chapter 18.
Kaddur AA and Cuq B (2011) Dynamic NIR spectroscopy to monitor bread dough
mixing: A short review. American Journal of Food Technology 6: 173–185.
Koksel H, Kahraman K, Sanal T, Sivri D, and Dubat A (2009) Potential utilization of
mixolab for quality evaluation of bread wheat genotypes. Cereal Chemistry
86: 522–526.
MacRitchie F, Simsek S, and Brookfield D (2014) Rheology. Cereal Foods World 59(5):
254.
Mihalos MM (2009) Mixers. In: Pyler EJ and Gorton LA (eds.) Baking science and
technology, vol. 2, 4th ed., pp. 403–421. Kansas City, MO: Sosland.
Shewry PR, Ovidio RD, Lafiandra D, Jenkins JA, Mills ENC, and Békés F (2009) Wheat
grain proteins. In: Khan K and Shewry PR (eds.) Wheat chemistry and technology,
4th ed., pp. 223–298. St Paul, MN: AACC Press.
Sluimer P (2005) Principles of breadmaking: Functionality of raw materials and process
steps. St Paul, MN: AACC International.
Tömösközi S, Szendi Sz, Bagdi A, et al. (2012) New possibilities in micro-scale wheat
quality characterisation: micro-gluten determination and starch isolation. In: He Z
and Wangm D (eds.) Proceedings of 11th international gluten workshop, Beijing,
pp. 123–126. Mexico City: CIMMYT.
Weipert D (2006) Fundamentals of rheology and spectroscopy. In: Popper L, Schafer W,
and Freund W (eds.) Future of flour – a compendium of flour improvement,
pp. 117–168. Bergen, Germany: AgriMedia.
Wesley IJ, Larsen N, Osborne BG, and Skerritt JH (1998) Non-invasive monitoring of
dough mixing by NIR. Journal of Cereal Science 27: 61–69.
Relevant Websites
http://www.aaccnet.org/Pages/default.aspx.
http://www.brabender.com/english/food/products/quality-control/rheology/dough-
properties-gluten.
http://www.chopin.fr/fr/.
http://www.foodequipment.com.au/v1/mixers.html.
https://www.icc.or.at/.
http://www.perten.com/products/.