Huda_2023_IOP_Conf._Ser.__Earth_Environ._Sci._1230_012166

IOP Conference Series: Earth and
Environmental Science
PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Prebiotic attributes of inulin enriched
The effect of modified (preheated) soybean biscuits: sensory and nutritional aspects
C Raihing and S U Mageshwari
concentrate powder on high protein biscuit - Optimization of biscuit formula based on
denaturated whey protein concentrate and
sweet potato flour in some protein and
To cite this article: S Huda et al 2023 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 1230 012166 mineral concentrations
H D Hayati, E Wulandari and R Andoyo
- The formulation of alternative gluten-free

mung bean biscuits
Siti Fathonah, Rosidah, Bethari Amalia et
View the article online for updates and enhancements. al.
This content was downloaded from IP address 114.122.111.118 on 13/02/2024 at 14:54

FSSAT-4 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1230 (2023) 012166 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1230/1/012166
The effect of modified (preheated) soybean concentrate

powder on high protein biscuit
S Huda, Y Taira, S Rahimah, and S Nurhasanah

Department of Food Industrial Technology, Faculty of Agro-Industrial Technology,
Universitas Padjadjaran, Indonesia
Email: syamsul.huda@unpad.ac.id
Abstract: Protein is a key structural component in many foods. Soybeans are a plant-based
protein source, that is used in food. Soy concentrate is generally high in nutrients, particularly
protein, with an essential amino acid profile that is immense in plant products and closely
resembles animal protein. In increasing the characteristics of processed soybean products, such
as physical modification, namely the preheated process. The preheated process is a physical
modification that requires heating the product at a specific temperature and time, with the aim
of reaching the protein denaturation point for improving the functional characteristic of protein
contents. Greater public interest in healthy diets, leading to contributes to the development of
protein-enriched foods, one of which is biscuits. The aim of this study was to determine the effect
of modified preheated soybean concentrate powder in the physical characteristic of high protein
biscuits (11 – 15%). Texture characteristics, macrostructure, and sensory quality of biscuits were
studied. In this study, soy protein was preheated for 20 minutes at a temperature of 80℃. The
results showed that preheated treatment affected a decrease in texture quality compared to control
biscuits, also it induced a decrease in porosity of biscuits, compared to control. The preheated
treatment that reaches the denaturation point simulate improving the physical characteristic of
biscuit, one of which is not give an excessive textural effect in the formulation of high-protein
food. The best-preheated treatment was found in an 11% soy biscuit with a great texture. ImageJ
analysis of macrostructural test results revealed that the porous biscuits were found in 11%
preheated soy biscuits. According to the comparison sensory, triangle test, the panelists cannot
defined a pair of control and 11% soy biscuit.
1. Introduction
Protein is an essential macronutrient [1]. Besides that, proteins may have other non-nutritional uses in
food; the most prevalent one is to provide the distinctive structure of the individual food. This structure
also plays a significant role in determining the cooked protein's texture [2]. Therefore, it plays an
essential role in the critical structure of foods [1,2]. In this decade, there has been much interest in plant-
based nutrition for developing high-protein foods enriched with foreign protein sources, one of which
is by adding soybean products [3,4]. Soybean contains 40% protein with the highest quality and quantity
of other plant-based protein sources, 20% cholesterol-free fat, including good polyunsaturated fatty
acids like linoleic acid (50% of total fat content), vitamins such as vitamin A, B, and C and D, also
minerals content like calcium (Ca) and phosphorus (P) [3,5,6]. One of the soybean products used in
developing baked goods is soy concentrate, a processed soybean product with high nutritional value and
quality.
Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
Soy concentrate is generally high in nutrients, particularly protein. Soy protein contains much
essential amino acid such as lysine, leucine, isoleucine, threonine, valine, phenylalanine, and tryptophan
and lack contents of Sulphur such as methionine and cysteine [7,8]. The primary components of soy
protein that are largely stored (up to 80%) in globulins include glycinin (11S globulin) and β-conglycinin
(7S globulin) [9,10]. Protein in soybeans is generally stored in globulins. β-conglycinin, which has a
trimeric glycoprotein structure, binds through hydrophobic interactions, that undergo complex
association-dissociation depending on pH and ionic strength [9,11]. Glycinin has a structure consisting
of 5 subunits consisting two polypeptides, namely acidic (A) and basic (B) polypeptides connected by
covalent, disulfide (SS) bonds [12,13].
In increasing the functional value and characteristics of processed soybean products, one of which is
a physical modification, namely the preheated process. The preheated process is a physical modification
that requires heating the product at a specific temperature and time, with the aim of reaching the protein
denaturation point in the form of aggregate, for improving the functional characteristic of protein
contents [14]. The heating process in soy protein induces irreversible unfolding and disrupts the
quaternary structures of β-conglycinin (7S) and glycinin (11S). The disulfide bonds between the broken
chains can initiate disulfide (S-S)-sulfhydryl (S-H) exchange reactions that play a role in protein cross-
linking, forming aggregates. The exposure of hydrophobic groups results in hydrophobic interactions
between protein molecules that can promote protein aggregation and cross-linking in the process of food
structure formation [15]. The transition of denatured protein formation in soy protein occurs at ±60℃
[12]. β-conglycinin denatures at 75 ℃, while glycinin protein denatures at 90 ℃. The denaturation
mechanism is controlled by subunit composition, interactions between subunits, ionic strength, and
reducing agents that will cause aggregation and polymerization reactions [16]. The aggregation process
by heating the two main protein components in soybeans results in the opening of the hydrophobic
groups on β-conglycinin and interaction (via disulfide bonds) with glycinin, leaving the N-terminal
region with hydrophilic glycans exposed to the outside, so the aggregation process is stopped and soluble
aggregates are formed [13]. The heating of soy protein components of soy concentrate, namely β-
conglycinin (7S) and glycinin (11S), has different aggregation formation characteristics. According to
J. Guo et al., [12] heating soy protein clusters simultaneously shows the interaction between β-
conglycinin and glycine—the presence of β-conglycinin groups covering the surface of glycine
aggregates, becoming non-hydrophobic residues [12]. The following is a scheme of the formation of
soy protein aggregates of β- conglycinin and glycinin, according to J. Guo et al [12].
Figure 1. Mechanism of Aggregate Formation in Soy Protein (Glycinin and

β-conglycinin) N = Native ; U = Unfolded (Denature); Agg = Aggregate [12].
In order to create bakery products enriched with foreign protein sources, there has been much interest
in plant-based nutrition, one of which is the development of biscuits [3]. Based on United States Agency
for International Development (USAID) and WFP/WHO (2011), the protein content in high-energy
biscuits is 10 g or 10 - 15% per 100 g protein packaged products [17]. Based on Indonesia's
Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA), consuming high-protein biscuits can fulfill 10 - 15% of daily
protein needs [18]. Generally, the higher addition of protein concentration in biscuits increases the
hardness of the biscuit texture compared to general biscuits [19]. The addition of protein concentration
in high-protein biscuits with the addition of soybean concentrate (native) results in an increase in texture
hardness by the thermal process (baking), with an increase in the concentration of protein added resulting
in changes in the characteristics of the biscuit structure [5,20].
2
The aim of this study was to determine the effect of modified preheated or denatured soybean
concentrate powder in the physical characteristic of high protein biscuits (11 – 15%). Texture
characteristics, image analysis from macrostructure, and sensory quality of control and treatment
biscuits (non-preheated and preheated) were studied.
2. Materials and Methods

The raw materials used for making 11 – 15% high protein biscuits were 12% of denatured soy
concentrate powder mixed with amount of water, all purposed flour, sweet potato flour, skim milk
powder, egg yolk, 0.2 – 0.35% mineral powder and syrup (magnesium and zinc supplement, ferro syrup),
sugar, margarine, vanilla powder, and leavening agent such as baking powder and baking soda.
2.1. Preparation of denatured soy concentrate powder

Denatured soy concentrate powder was prepared by calculating, and diluting 12% soy protein content
of soy concentrate powder in amount of water for heating in waterbath by holding the temperature at
80℃ for 20 minutes. As the concentration of high protein biscuit increased, the amount of denatured
soy protein increased in dough. The ratio of the addition of soy concentrate powder and water is shown
in the data table below:
Table 1. Ratio of soy concentrate powder and water.
Sample Soy Concentrate Powder (g) Water (ml)
Biscuit 11% 7.18 18.29
Biscuit 13% 15.90 40.51
Biscuit 15% 26.39 67.24
2.2. Formulation of biscuit

The amount of denatured soy protein was varied according to percentage of protein content in high
protein biscuits (11%, 13% and 15%), meanwhile the other ingredients were fixed. In this study, the
formulation of biscuits were divided into 2 groups experimental sample that is undenatured (native) soy
concentrate (NPH) and denatured soy concentrate (PH). Formulation of biscuits used in this study
showed as follow:
Table 2. Formulation of high protein biscuit.
Ingredient Control Native Soy Concentrate (Group A) Denatured Soy Concentrate (Group B)
NPH 11 NPH 13 NPH 15 PH 11 PH 13 PH 15
9% 11% 13% 15% 11% 13% 15%
Soy concentrate 0 7.18 15.90 26.39 7.18 15.90 26.39
(g)
Water (ml) 11 18.29 40.51 67.24 18.29 40.51 67.24
Margarine (g) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Sugar (g) 21 21 21 21 21 21 21
Egg yolk (g) 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
Sweet potato 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
flour (g)
All purposed 35.83 35.83 35.83 35.83 35.83 35.83 35.83
flour (g)
Skim milk 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
powder (g)
Vanilla (g) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Calcium Lactate 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
(g)
Zinc Gluconate 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
(g)
3
Ingredient Control Native Soy Concentrate (Group A) Denatured Soy Concentrate (Group B)
9% 11% 13% 15% 11% 13% 15%
Iron 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Polymaltose
Complex (IPC)
(ml)
Baking Powder 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
(g)
Baking Soda (g) 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22
Total (g) 93.63 108.10 139.04 176.26 108.10 139.04 176.26
2.3. Baking procedure

The biscuit was baked using the creaming method according to Misra and Tiwari [21], Zaker Md and
TR [22], with some modification process. Ingredient was used for preparation biscuit according to
formula above. Sieve dry ingredients and mixed to obtain a uniform blend. Fat or margarine and sugar
were mixed thoroughly to obtain shortening cream. The shortening mix was mixed with mixer, further
for 3 minutes at 860 rpm. Both dry and wet mixture were mixed separately. Then mixed dry ingredients
was added to shortening cream, and mixed for 1 minute at 860 rpm. The mixture of soy protein
(undenatured and denatured) and water was added to the dough bowl and mixed thoroughly. When the
dough was ready, it was kept for 10 – 15 minutes as it is and then used for molding with customized
frame of mould cookies (thickness : 3 cm ; height : 5 cm) on the baking tray. The shape dough of biscuit
was baked at a temperature of 110 - 135℃ for 20 – 30 minutes. The baked biscuits were allowed to cool
at room temperature, then packaged in an airtight container.
2.4. Texture (hardness) of biscuit

Texture analysis of biscuit was conducted to determine hardness. Hardness of biscuits was determined
using TA.XTExpress (Stable Micro Systems) equipped with a 5 kg loading cell. Exponent Lite Express
software was used to measure and acquire data. The procedure for texture analysis was according to the
method of Di Cairano et al. [23], Filipčev et al. [24], with a modification. Biscuit hardness was
determined using a 6 mm cylindrical probe (P/6). The apparatus configuration and setting were: pre-test
speed 1 mm/s, test speed 4 mm/s and post-test speed 10 mm/s with travel distance 10 mm. The sample
was placed on the two holders of the adapter and the cutting probe was lowered until it met the sample.
The probe acts as a third point of contact, exerting increasing pressure until the biscuit structure breaks.
Measurements of the hardness of biscuits were made at deform biscuits, when the maximum peak force
shown and form the area under the curve. That maximum peak force was used to calculate the hardness
value. The measurement of each sample was done in three replication, each replication conducting three
biscuit sample for each formulation were analyzed.
2.5. Image analysis of biscuit

Image analysis of the macrostructure from biscuits is conducted to determine biscuit porosity based on
descriptive and fractal dimension analyses. The image sample was taken with a camera, where the
samples were placed inside a black box, adjusting the light and angle as desired. A descriptive analysis
of biscuits by describing the visible image that showed the porous structure of biscuits from each
formulation of biscuits and the form shown by 1200x120 pixels. Fractal analysis of biscuit pores was
determined using ImageJ Analysis software to measure and acquire dimension fractal data from each
sample. Images were transformed into 8-bit grey scale binary images with the same pixel size (1200 x
120 pixels) and were threshold. The procedure of dimension fractal contains two significant steps,
thresholding the image and determining the fractal dimension value from box counting. The procedure
for biscuits macrostructure analysis was conducted according to Kuhn et al. [25] with some
modifications. The thresholding of the image was using auto-threshold settings by the Otsu method
4
in ImageJ software. Thresholding by Otsu method is shown where the thresholding or image
segmentation process is based on a discriminant analysis to find the maximum separation point of two
classes (highest and lowest) [26,27]. Following the steps, the fractal dimension (Df) values of the biscuit
(pores) structure are calculated using the box-counting method. The fractal dimension found, based on
the calculation of the scaling rule shown below :
𝐿𝑜𝑔 𝑁ℇ
𝐷= − [25] (1)
log ℇ
N ℇ stand for number of boxes at a certain scale that contains part of the image (foreground pixels),
while ℇ is the corresponding scale (in pixels), and D stand for the fractal dimension on a two-dimensional
(2D) form. Since image analysis determines Df value in a two-dimensional space, it is necessary to add
an extra dimension for calculated D value that represent the three-dimensional features of the image
structure, according to the equation below.
Df = D + 1 [25] (2)
In this study, there were seven samples from each biscuit treatment, and each sample consisted of at
least five macroscopic images recorded.
2.6. Sensory evaluation

To assess the differences between control and soy treatment biscuits, a comparison sensory evaluation,
namely a triangle test, was conducted by an untrained panelist with no replication. A panel of fifteen
judges was recruited from staff and students at the Food Industrial Technology Department, Faculty of
Agro-industrial Technology, University of Padjadjaran. This number of panelists is considered adequate
for indicating an odd sample from three samples in each set (different from the other two), in which
testing samples consist of six pair serving or six sets of control biscuit and treatment (undenatured and
denatured) biscuit (11%, 13%, and 15%). Tasters asses all three samples, then pick the sample with
different characteristics (color, taste, texture, or hardness) from each set sample or the odd one out. The
significance of the triangle test requires a number of the correct answer from the total response was 10%
(α = 0,10). The minimum correct answer for fifteen panelists was eight out of fifteen (8/15) from the
total responses according to the critical value number of the triangle test.
2.7. Statistical analysis

In this study, all experiments were repeated at least three times, and the data were expressed as mean.
The experimental design used was descriptive descriptive explanatory research, then the calculated
results of the experiments were subjected to statistical analysis using paired t-test, to determine
significant difference between control sample and experimental sample that had a treatment (preheated)
(undenatured and denatured) using IBM SPSS software (version 25.0, SPSS Institute Inc., Chicago, IL,
USA). Significant difference was defined as p < 0.05.
3. Result and discussion
3.1. Texture (hardness) of biscuit

The texture property of biscuits is specifically related to their eating quality. In terms of breaking
strength, the peak force needed to snap biscuits is a measure of hardness, one of the many textural
parameters for biscuits, that is regarded as a crucial characteristic [28]. The hardness of native
(undenatured) and preheated (denatured) soy protein biscuits was determined by force (gram) required
in compressing the sample calculated from a force (g) – time (s) graph. The effect of adding native and
modified (preheated) soy concentrate powder on the hardness properties of the cookies is presented in
Figure 2. The average hardness values from each treatment sample are presented in Figure 2.
5
Hardness of Biscuit Group A

2000
1500
Force (g)
1000
500
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Time (s)
Control NPH 11 NPH 13 NPH 15
Figure 2. Graphic of peak force (hardness) from group a (non-

preheated/NPH) soy concentrate on high protein biscuits.
Hardness of Biscuit Group B

2000
1500
Force (g)
1000
500
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Time (s)
Control PH 11 PH 13 PH 15
Figure 3. Graphic of peak force (hardness) from group b

(modified (preheated/PH)) soy concentrate on high protein
biscuits.
Table 3. Peak force (hardness) from group A (non-preheated/NPH) and group b (modified
(preheated/PH) soy concentrate on high protein biscuits.
Peak Force (g) Control 11 13 15
Group A 818.49 1701.77 1254.69 1472.34
Group B 818.49 1512.17 1378.86 1750.16
Time (s) Control 11 13 15

Group A 0.16 0.21 0.22 0.20
Group B 0.16 0.18 0.17 0.20
Based on a force-time graph (Figure 2, 3 and Table 3) shows the maximum peak force of the
undenatured and denatured soy protein biscuits. The addition of soy concentrate powder in biscuit
6
formulations significantly changed the biscuits textural (hardness) quality. According to the peak force
graph, the control biscuits showed the lowest peak force (818.49 g) compared to the undenatured and
denatured soy concentrate powder biscuits. The results from group A showed that the higher
incorporation of the undenatured soy concentrate powder decreased the peak force of the soy biscuits
from 1701.77 g (NPH 11) to 1254.69 g (NPH 13), then increased to 1472.34 g (NPH 15). the results
from group B showed that the higher incorporation of the denatured soy concentrate powder decreased
the peak force of the soy biscuits from 1512.17 g (PH 11) to 1378.86 g (PH 13), then increased to
1750.16 g (PH 15).
The difference in the speed of time in reaching the peak force in biscuit hardness characteristics is
influenced by the composition of the biscuit and the interaction between the ingredients, as well as the
quality of the interaction between the ingredients. In the formulation of high-protein biscuits based on
commercial soy concentrate, increasing the protein concentration in the biscuit formulation resulted in
a decrease in the hardness of the biscuit texture. Increasing the amount of denatured soy concentrate
with preheated process in 11%, 13%, and 15% biscuit formulations led to an increase in biscuit hardness
as the protein concentration in the biscuits increased. The result of decreasing the highest point of
biscuit-breaking strength is opposed to the results of previous research by Yang et al., where the addition
of black soybean flour increased the hardness (N) of biscuit texture as the amount of protein in the
biscuit increased [29]. Similar results were found by Ghoshal & Kaushik, where the addition of 15-25%
soymeal flour concentration increased the texture hardness of biscuits compared to the control biscuits
[5]. The increase in the peak breaking point or hardness of the biscuits is due to the increase in protein
content in the biscuits, where the addition of soy flour results in a decrease in the gluten content of the
biscuits, causing a reduction in the formation of gluten networks that provide a crunchy texture [30,31].
Preheated treatment of soy protein changes the structure of the native form, which is tightly folded
into a denatured structure [32]. Under native conditions, soy protein has a greater water-holding capacity
(more hydrophilic site) than denatured protein (increased hydrophobic site), so the denaturation process
on soy protein is expected to minimize the effect of extreme changes on biscuits. The increase in
hardness as soy concentration increases in biscuits is due to the interaction of protein and starch through
hydrogen bonding during the dough development [28]. In Xie et al., lower water absorption is associated
with higher texture hardness [33]. The decrease in texture hardness of group A biscuit was influenced
by increased moisture content due to the baking process at a less-than-optimal temperature and time
[34]. Increasing the concentration of soybean causes a decrease in the starch content of the dough. It
increases soybean protein's water absorption ability, reducing the formation of biscuit structure [35].
The increase in the breaking force peak point of the biscuit compression hardness graph generally shows
a greater compressive force with increasing time. The graph of group B results is by the above statement.
The NPH 13 sample of group A showed that the time required to reach the peak of maximum force took
longer with the lowest level of hardness. This indicates a difference in the internal structure and hardness
of the biscuits produced [34].
7
Hardness (Average) of Biscuits from Group A and

Group B
3000
Force (g)
2000
1000
0
Control 11 13 15
Group A 1256.34 2498.83 1746.18 1551.71
Group B 1256.34 2155.08 1859.66 2226.15
Group A Group B
Figure 4. Diagram of average biscuits hardness data from group a (non-

preheated/NPH) and group b (modified preheated/PH) soy concentrate on
high protein biscuits.
Table 4. Average of biscuits hardness data (undenatured or non-preheated/NPH)

and (modified, preheated/PH or denatured) soy concentrate on high protein
biscuits.
Sample Hardness (g)
NPH 11 2498.83 ± 330.86*
NPH 13 1746.18 ± 184.80*
NPH 15 1551.71 ± 263.09*
PH 11 2155.08 ± 546.24*
PH 13 1859.66 ± 325.81*
PH 15 2226.15 ± 154.65*
Noted : Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation of the mean. P value was calculated using
paired t test. P< 0.05 (compared with control biscuit). Statistically significant difference is marked
with (*)
As shown on a diagram of the average biscuits hardness (Figure 4), the undenatured and denatured soy
protein biscuits significantly changed the hardness quality. The results from both groups showed that
the incorporation of the soy concentrate powder resulting a higher hardness level than the control biscuit
(1256.34 g). From the results of the undenatured soy powder concentrate (Group A), it can be seen that
the hardness of the biscuits decreased with the higher addition level of undenatured (native) soy
concentrate powder, from 2498.83 g to 1551.71 g. On the otherwise, it can be seen that the hardness of
the denatured soy biscuits (Group B) increased with the higher addition level of denatured soy
concentrate powder, from 2155.08 g to 2226.15 g, except for the hardness decrease of PH 13 sample
(1859.66 g).
The increase in biscuit texture hardness is influenced by the increase in protein content and the
interaction of the protein with sugar during dough handling and baking [19]. The interaction of protein
and starch during the dough handling process until the baking process has a role in increasing the
hardness of the biscuit texture. The results of the research on the hardness texture of group A biscuits
are in line with the results of Tang & Liu, where the addition of soy protein resulted in a decrease in
biscuit hardness lower than the control, which affected the changes in the physical characteristics of the
biscuits [3]. Contrary to the above results, group B had similar results obtained by the results of Yang
et al.'s research, where the hardness of the biscuit texture increased the hardness value of the biscuits in
the black soybean flour-blend base biscuit compared to the control biscuit of 6.81 N (wheat flour base)
[29]. These results also align with the study by Olakanmi et al., which observed that the substitution of
8
wheat protein with legume products and legumes affected the quality characteristics of the bread
produced, resulted in a decrease in bread volume along with an increase in the hardness of the bread
crumb texture during an increase in the level of soy protein substitution [36]. Increasing protein
substitution in high bread will slow gluten formation, decreasing the gas retention ability during the
proofing to the baking process. Making biscuits with high-protein ingredients contributes to the strong
binding of protein and starch through hydrogen bonding during dough development and baking [33].
The increased protein content of biscuits results in increased protein interactions with other components,
such as protein to protein, protein to carbohydrate, sugar, and other component interactions during the
dough development and baking process, which is also associated with increased biscuit texture hardness
[19,28,37,38].
Increasing the addition of soybean concentrate increases the free sulfhydryl (SH-free) and disulfide
(S-S) content in the dough. Generally, disulfide bonds (S-S) intrinsically in gliadin and glutenin will be
disrupted and recombined during gluten formation. The free sulfhydryl (S-H) combine to form disulfide
bonds (S-S), contributing to the gluten network, interacting with wheat proteins to produce weak dough
due to the inhibition of gluten network formation [39,40]. The disruption of gluten formation in the
presence of soy protein is related to the degree of denaturation of soy protein. Soy protein denatured
during the dough handling process can form gluten due to the breakdown of molecular protein chains,
increasing its interaction with wheat proteins [39]. Preliminary heat treatment of soy protein can improve
the baking properties of wheat flour-composite (soy) based products [40]. The heating process of soy
protein in biscuit making with the preheating process results in irreversible denaturation of soy protein,
with exposure of hydrophobic and sulfhydryl groups that enhance the formation of protein aggregates,
resulting in gelation when protein concentration is high [41]. The denaturation of soy protein in the
preheated process is expected to reduce the interaction of soy protein with the dough during the dough
handling process (mixing-baking), to produce a reduction in the interaction of soy-wheat protein
forming the biscuit matrix, to produce a decrease in the texture hardness of soy biscuits compared to
native soy.
In the baking process, there is an interaction between starch and protein. During the baking process,
protein interaction and protein interaction with starch (gelatinization) are found, affecting the product's
structural properties. Gelatinized starch and protein can decompose, rearrange, hydrolyze, and
physically crosslink, improving the texture of the resulting product [42]. In Ma et al., protein
denaturation leads to aggregation during the preheated treatment process. The second aggregation
inhibition of the particles occurs because the less reactive groups are allowed to crosslink between the
protein particles due to the denaturation and aggregation process in the preheated treatment [41],
according to the results of J. Wang et al. research in the reheating process, particles that are stable to
heating can inhibit aggregation due to more significant conformational changes with a higher degree of
denaturation and have a more compact aggregate structure. On the other hand, aggregation of soy protein
at 85℃ results in partial denaturation of soy protein due to the lower preheated temperature than glycinin
(11S) denaturation temperature.
Based on the results of the hardness level of the biscuits produced, group B biscuits have an increased
hardness level as soy protein is added to the biscuit formulation. The results between groups A and B
showed that at a concentration of 11%, preheated biscuits produced a lower texture than biscuits with
the addition of native soy protein. In groups 13 and 15%, preheated biscuits had a higher texture than
biscuits with the addition of native soy protein. It is due to the interaction between soy protein and wheat
protein during dough handling, where there is undenatured soy protein. The proteins not denatured in
the preheated process further interact during baking. In conclusion, a significant difference (p<0.05) was
found between the mean hardness value of control and undenatured or denatured soy concentrate biscuits
(Table 4.). The enhancement of the biscuit's hardness is significantly more massive with the
incorporation of denatured soy concentrate at 15% level biscuits formulation with the increased hardness
average value was calculated, therefor further biscuits formulation is required to resulting not such
excessive changes in biscuits product.
9
3.2. Image analysis of biscuit

The macrostructure of native (undenatured) and preheated (denatured) soy protein biscuits was
determined by descriptive analysis and Fractal dimension (DF value) determination. A descriptive
analysis of the biscuit was accomplished by describing the image of the biscuit's pores structure that
proof by the total area of porosity from each samples. Determining fractal dimension value is required
to measure and acquire dimension fractal data from each sample. In order to understand the effect of
adding native and modified soy concentrate powder in high protein biscuits formulation, the images of
the biscuits macrostructure with 1200 x 120 pixels were used. The effect of adding native and modified
(preheated) soy concentrate powder on the macrostructure by descriptive analysis properties of the
cookies is presented in Figure 4. The average of porosity area and porosity size from biscuit are
presented in Figure 5 and 6. The thresholding image of the biscuit pores structure are presented in Figure
7. The average fractal dimension values from each treatment sample are presented in Figure 8.
3.2.1. Descriptive analysis and porosity area of biscuits
Control
NPH 11
NPH 13
NPH 15
PH 11
PH 13
PH 15
Figure 5. Macrostructure of Biscuits Pores (size = 1200 x 120 pixels) from Non
preheated (NPH) group and Modified, Preheated (PH) Soy Concentrate on High
Protein Biscuits where dark grey or black pixels represent the porous structure and the
light grey pixels represent the biscuit structure.
Porosity Area of Group A and Group B Biscuits

50000
Total Area (pixels)
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
Control 11 13 15
Group A 34820.53 35224.80 34611.87 35142.80
Group B 34820.53 32557.53 33916.27 29028.67
Group A Group B
Figure 6. Diagram of average biscuits porosity area from group a (non-preheated/NPH)
and group b (modified preheated/PH) soy concentrate on high protein biscuits.
10
Table 5. Average of biscuits porosity area from group a (non-preheated/NPH) and group b
(preheated/PH) soy concentrate on high protein biscuits.
Sample Total Area (Pixels)
NPH 11 35224.80 ± 8510.29
NPH 13 34611.87 ± 8906.14
NPH 15 35142.80 ± 8270.29
PH 11 32557.73 ± 10189.56
PH 13 33916.27 ± 14019.75
PH 15 29028.67 ± 12160.63
Noted : Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation of the mean. P value was calculated using
paired t test. P< 0.05 (compared with control biscuit). Statistically significant difference is marked
with (*)
Average Size of Biscuits Porosity

600
443.20
400 417.43
229.89 242.94
242.43
200 200.21 204.27
0
Control 11 13 15
Group A Group B
Figure 7. Diagram of average size of biscuits porosity from group a (non-

preheated/NPH) and group b (modified preheated/PH) soy concentrate on high
protein biscuits.
The picture above (Figure 5.) shows that the control biscuits have a big porous with some more pores
compared to treatment (undenatured and denatured soy protein) biscuits. The picture also showed that
the incorporation of the soy concentrate powder decreased the number of pores and size. From the results
of the undenatured soy powder concentrate (Group A), it can be seen that the NPH 13 and NPH 15
biscuits have tiny pores that construct all over the biscuits samples, with the NPH 11 biscuits having a
similar structure of pores according to the picture above. This is in agreement with the calculation of the
total area from biscuits in Figure 5, where there is an increase in the total area of the pore structure in
the 11% (35224.80 pixels) and 15% (35142.80 pixels) NPH biscuits compared to the control biscuits
(34820.53 pixels), and there is a decrease in the total area in the 13% NPH biscuits (34611.87). The
variations in the size of the porosity formed in the biscuits are a significant decrease from the 11%, 13%
to 15% NPH samples (242.43 to 200.21, and increased to 204.27 pixels) compared to the control biscuits
(443.20 pixels), as shown at the figure 7.
The same results showed in denatured soy concentrate (Group B) that PH 15 biscuits have a small
size of pores and decreased the number of pores that construct a denser biscuits samples, with the PH
11 and PH 13 biscuits having similar pores structure with the control sample. This is in agreement with
the calculation of the total area from biscuits in Figure 6, where there is a decrease in the total area of
11
the pore structure as the increase of the soy protein contents in biscuits PH 11% (32557.53 pixels),
slightly increased in PH 13% biscuits (33916.27 pixels) and decrease at PH 15% biscuits (29028.67
pixels). The variations in porosity size formed in the biscuits (Figure 7) show a slight decrease in pore
size in 11% of biscuits (417.43 pixels) compared to the control. In comparison, 13% and 15% of biscuits
have a significant decrease in pore size (229.89 and 242.94 pixels) compared to the control biscuits
(443.20 pixels). Based on the above figures, it can be concluded that NPH 11, 13, and 15 biscuits have
a more porous structure than PH 11, PH 13, and PH 15 biscuits, with a significant decrease in the average
size of porosity in the biscuits, compared to the control, which has the highest area structure and porosity
size.
The formation of pore structure in soybean addition biscuits affects the shape and variation of pore
size with an even distribution of pores in the cross-section of the biscuit. The pore structure of biscuits
represents a product quality attribute produced by air cell formation and expansion, as well as volume
development in the baking process. Large-sized pores form due to the increased coalescence of air
bubbles before the gelatinization of starch in the baking process. The greater air-holding capacity in the
dough system leads to a slower air rise in the early baking process, with a lower gas loss rate and a larger
specific volume of the baked product [43]. Based on result above, the decrease in the pore structure of
biscuits is influenced by the increase in the addition of soy concentrate, so biscuits with higher protein
form a pore structure with a smaller size and is dispersed.
This study's results align with Nicole et al., where the addition of soy protein isolate (SPI) to biscuits
resulted in a denser biscuit structure [44]. This occurs due to the inhibition of gluten network formation
by SPI, by disrupting the gluten structure and limiting the availability of water in gluten network
formation. In dough mixing, soy proteins can aggregate and interact with wheat proteins through
disulfide bonds [44]. It is confirmed by the pore structure image and the quantification of the total area
above, where the pore structure formed in the treated biscuits has less pore structure or has small pores
size compared to the control. In addition, soy protein can affect pore uniformity, where the resulting
pores are not homogeneous and tend to separate with aggregated parts. A decrease in pore structure in
the presence of denatured soy protein can form aggregates and inhibit the gluten network, causing a
weakening of the gluten network so that it cannot hold air in the heating or baking process. In addition,
other factors, such as the rate of water evaporation, can affect the decrease in pore structure in biscuits
[44–46]. In particular, macroscopic variations in pore structure may occur due to variations in moisture
content across products, which may indicate differences in the degree of starch gelatinization [46].
In conclusion, there was no significant difference (p>0.05) between the mean total porosity area
values of control and treated soy concentrate biscuits, based on the paired t-test results (Table 5). The
increase in the pore structure of the biscuits decreased significantly with the addition of undenatured
and denatured soy concentrate at the 13% and 15% soy protein addition levels, based on the total area
and average area of porosity. Descriptive analysis of the macrostructure of the biscuit samples showed
that biscuits containing 11% protein, mainly distributed by soy protein, may not have exaggerated
changes in the biscuit samples, as proven by the total porosity area of the biscuits and the average size
distribution of the pore structure.
3.2.2. Dimension fractal of biscuits. In fractal dimension analysis, two main steps are carried out: the
thresholding process and the calculation of the DF value by the Box Counting Method. In this study,
Otsu thresholding method was applied. The resulting thresholding image is separated into two parts: the
pore structure marked with black or image background and the biscuit structure marked with white. Otsu
method can evaluate the image's threshold value well within each gray level formed in the image. This
approach is also widely used in pore structure segmentation and can classify pore structures, grains, and
high-density inclusions [47]. The following image is a digital (2D) picture of the results of the biscuit
Thresholding process through the Otsu method (1200 x 120 pixels) :
12
Figure 8. Image of biscuit structure (2D) before and after thresholding. top image = control
biscuit. left side = non-preheated (NPH) soy concentrate on high protein biscuits 11%, 13%,
and 15%. right side = pre-heated (PH) soy concentrate on high protein biscuits. Dark grey
or black pixels represent the porous structure and the light grey pixels represent the biscuit
structure.
The threshold image above (Figure 8) is followed by calculating the DF value using the Box Counting
Method. The Box Counting Method is a method of calculating the DF value based on 2D images of the
pore structure from the slope of the least squares linear regression on a logarithmic plot (number of
boxes) per-log (box size/length) [46]. The average value of DF in each control and treatment biscuit
sample (group A and group B) was obtained as follows:
Fractal Dimension (Df) Value of Biscuits from
Group A and Group B
3.00
2.58 2.55 2.54 2.56 2.55 2.56 2.50
2.50
Fractal DImension
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
Control 11 13 15
Group A Group B
Figure 9. Fractal dimension (value) of biscuits pores (size = 1200 x 120

pixels) data from group a (non-preheated/NPH) and group b (preheated/PH)
soy concentrate on high protein biscuits.
13
Table 6. Average of fractal dimension (Df) of non-preheated (NPH) and modified,

preheated (PH) soy concentrate on high protein biscuits.
Sample Fractal Dimension

NPH 11 2.55 ± 0.07
NPH 13 2.56 ± 0.07
NPH 15 2.56 ± 0.07
PH 11 2.54 ± 0.06
PH 13 2.55 ± 0.10
PH 15 2.50 ± 0.09*
Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation of the mean. P value was calculated using paired t test. P<
0.05 (compared with control biscuit). Statistically significant difference is marked with (*).
Based on a diagram of the average biscuits fractal dimension (Df) value (Figure 9.), the undenatured
and denatured soy protein biscuits had slightly significant changed the fractal dimension value. It is
shown, the DF values varies in a close range from each samples (2.50 – 2.58). The results from both
groups showed, the incorporation of the soy concentrate powder resulting a decreased of DF values than
the control biscuit (2.58). From the results of the undenatured soy powder concentrate (Group A), it can
be seen that the value of fractal dimension increased insignificantly with the higher addition level of
undenatured (native) soy concentrate powder, from 2.55 to 2.56. On the other hands, result showed at
the group B that the DF value of the denatured soy biscuits (Group B) decreased with the higher addition
level of denatured (preheated) soy concentrate powder (except increased in 11% to 13%), from 2.54 to
2.50.
The macrostructure of the biscuit porosity in this research also described and measured
experimentally using the fractal concept. In this study, the fractal concepts used in characterizing the
morphological structure of biscuits, in an irregular pore structure [48]. Based on the DF value method,
namely Fractal Brownian Motion (FBM) method, the particle network in the formation of aggregates is
divided into two cluster models, i.e. Diffusion-Limited Cluster Aggregation (DLCA) and Reaction-
Limited Cluster Aggregation (RLCA). To explain DLCA and RLCA fractal aggregation clusters by
quantifying the aggregated particle structure using DF calculations [48,49]. Aggregation in DLCA
clusters is rapid, with particles of the structural network bonding at first contact and inter-particle
collisions limited by Brownian motion. The aggregation in DLCA clusters in the three-dimensional
model is shown to vary with DF values of 1.7 – 1.8. RLCA clusters generally proceed more slowly due
to electrostatic repulsion between particles approaching each other. Aggregation in RLCA clusters is
presented in three-dimensional form, with DF values varying from 1.9 – 2.1 or 2.0 – 2.2 [49–51].
Based on the explanation above, the DF value that represents the porosity formed in the biscuits
shows that RLCA aggregation clusters are formed in the biscuits, with the results of the DF value greater
than 2.5. The research results generated fractal dimension values in measuring pore irregularity or
coarseness throughout the sample structure. In Rahimi et al., an increase in higher DF values resulted in
pores with more random patterns with irregular geometry shapes [52]. Caused by the diffusion of carbon
dioxide (CO2) during the handling process, the expansion resulted from the influence of the thermal
process, resulting in thinning of the gas cell wall from the pressure gradients, which depends on its
thickness. The presence of gluten from wheat flour in the dough affects the expansion of the gas cells,
which results in a different pore geometry compared to the reduced gluten content in the dough. This is
in line with the results of the research, where the control biscuits had the highest DF value. Similar
findings were found by Rahimi et al., where baked products with wheat flour had the highest value,
followed by chickpea, millet, tiff, and amaranth [52].
It was explained by Kouhsari et al. and Rathnayake et al. that higher DF values represent more
complex structural images or crumb images with coarser gray levels, while lower DF values have
simpler and finer structural [46,53]. In the results of this study, it was found that the DF value of each
treatment was not significantly different, so the pore structure formed tended to be complex, with a
decrease in the complexity of the pore structure as the protein concentration of the biscuits increased.
14
This study also relates to the texture characteristics produced, where in this study, the increase in protein
concentration increased the level of hardness of the biscuits. It follows that there is a decrease in the
pore structure formed in the biscuits. The texture of biscuits is influenced by the cell structure, with
smooth, thin-walled cells having a uniform size, producing a softer texture compared to rough, open,
thick-walled cell structures.
In conclusion, a significant difference (p<0.05) was found between the mean fractal dimension value
of control and 15% PH denatured soy concentrate biscuits, according to paired t-test results (Table 6).
The enhancement of the biscuit's fractal dimension value is slightly increased for group A and decreased
for group B, with the incorporation of denatured soy concentrate at 11% to 15% level biscuits
formulation. The addition of soy protein in the biscuit formulation did not significantly change the
biscuit's structure. The fractal dimension value average was calculated, and the result revealed that
suitable high protein biscuits with less excessive change characteristics are 11% and 13% level soy
protein supplement. Further biscuits formulation is required to resulting not such excessive changes to
resulting high protein biscuits using soy concentrate powder.
3.3. Sensory evaluation

The biscuit prepared by incorporation of undenatured soy concentrate and modified (denatured) soy
concentrate for different concentration of high protein biscuits (11%, 13% and 15%) were subjected to
the sensory evaluation by fifteen panelist using triangle test, with six paired set of biscuits. The data was
analyzed, and the compiled data was presented in figure 10. Each treatment soy (undenatured and
denatured) was evaluated against control biscuit to asses different sample characteristic in paired sample
set. Different characteristic of biscuits choose according to their color, taste and texture or hardness of
biscuits samples.
Triangle Test of NPH and PH Biscuits

16
14
12
10
8 8 8 8 8 8 8
6
4
2
7 9 9 6 10 14 4 9 9 7 5 7 6 8 6 9 9 11
0
Color Taste Texture Minimum Corrcet Responses α =0,10)
Figure 10. Comparison of sensory attributes from non-preheated (NPH) and modified
by preheated (PH) soy concentrate on high protein biscuits.
Based on the sensory attributes displayed in figure 10 showed that the biscuits were affected by the
addition of soy concentrate powder in some parameters. The average scores indicate an increase in taste
(flavor) and texture (hardness) with increasing levels of soy concentrate powder incorporated in the
formulation of high-protein biscuits with the addition of soy protein. According to the data above, the
parameters of color did not exhibit predictable patterns scores with variation treatment, as evidenced by
the panelist score (correct answer <8) indicating that panelist cannot distinguish between control biscuit
and treatment biscuits. Furthermore, the taste and texture parameters shown that panelist could still point
15
differences between control biscuit and treatment biscuit with amounts of soy concentrate powder added
to biscuits at NPH 11% - NPH 15% and PH 15% samples.
Color or appearance is an important quality indicator of fine food that influence consumer acceptance,
perceived by the human sense [54]. Based on the panelist's perception, the score of the color showed
that the addition of soy concentrate, non-preheated (undenatured), and modified or preheated
(denatured) cannot differ from the control biscuit, as evidenced by the panelist score (correct answer
<8) so that explains the addition of soy concentrate was not affecting the color characteristic of the
biscuit, except for the PH 15% biscuit paired samples. Hence, adding soy protein to the biscuit
formulation could have well influenced the biscuit's quality. Based on the report from the panelist’s, the
PH 15% biscuit paired has darker color of biscuit, compared to control. This happened caused of the
Maillard reaction which occurs due to several factors that affect the heating process, such as baking,
including temperature, humidity, and baking time. The Maillard reaction occurs in the browning non-
enzymatic reaction in the baking process between sugar molecules and undenatured amino acids, such
as lysine from soy protein [55–57].
Taste is the primary determinant of product’s acceptability, and has the greatest impact on a product’s
commercial success. Food identification, acceptance and appreciation are all assisted by taste [54,58].
Based on the panelist's perception, the score of the taste showed that the addition of soy concentrate,
non-preheated (undenatured), and modified or preheated (denatured) can differ from the control biscuit,
as evidenced by the panelist score (correct answer >8), so that explains the addition of soy concentrate
affecting the taste characteristic of the biscuit, except for the PH 11% biscuit paired samples. Based on
the report from the panelists, all paired samples (11%, 13%, 15%) biscuit has beany taste from soya
bean, except PH 11% paired sample. This indicated that the taste of the beany flavor in the biscuit
increased with the increased level of adding soy concentrate, this result agree with the work of Dhingra
and Sudesh [59], and Mishra and Ramesh [55]. The variations in volatiles produced during baking
process, was related to the differences in flavor of soy biscuit compared to control biscuit [56]. Soybean
has fiber, flavonoids, and bioactive peptides contents [60]. While soy protein products are made,
lipoxygenase enzymes oxidize unsaturated fatty acids, which cause an unpleasant beany taste. This kind
of off-flavor is mainly caused by volatile substances like n-hexanal and n-hexanol, which result from
the oxidation of the lipid process [61,62]. The beany flavor from soybean also happens during the
irreversible and reversible interaction between soy protein and volatile content during soybean
processing [63]. In this study, the PH 11% biscuits show unaffected biscuit taste made from denatured
soy concentrate, which indicated the objectional of beany flavor due to elimination while preheating
processing.
Touch, mouthfeel, sight, and hearing affect humans perceived texture. The texture is a prerequisite
in the acceptance of foods [54]. Texture also represents the product's internal structure regarding how it
responds to stress. Mechanical properties (such as hardness, adhesiveness, cohesiveness, gumminess,
springiness, Etc.) are measured by a kinesthetic sense in the tongue, jaw or lips, fingers, and hands [64].
Based on the panelist's perception, the score of the biscuit texture (hardness) showed the addition of soy
concentrate, non-preheated (undenatured), and modified or preheated (denatured) can differ from the
control biscuit, as evidenced by the panelist score (correct answer >8) so that explains the addition of
soy concentrate affecting to increased hardness characteristic of the biscuit, except for the PH 11% and
13% biscuit paired samples. According to the panelist report, all paired samples (11%, 13%, 15%) of
biscuit have a more rigid texture with the increased level of the addition of soy concentrate, except the
PH 11%, 13% paired sample, which has slightly difference hardness of the biscuit. Hardness, as well as
sensory hardness trial, were the most noticeable differences between control biscuits and increased with
soy concentrate addition. The sensory panelists cannot defined the control biscuits with either PH 11%,
13% soy concentrate. These results imply that the soy biscuit's acceptability, whether it had 11%, 13%
soy concentrate was comparable to the control biscuits. The texture data above (Figure. 3) shows that
adding soy protein with the increased soy protein desired in the higher protein biscuit leads to a decrease
in the texture quality of biscuits. Higher protein contents from soy concentrate, and thus the interaction
of protein-protein sources, protein-carbohydrates or starch and other components that interact during
16
dough development and baking, may attributed to the increase in the hardness of biscuits [28,38]. The
result agree according to Kulkarni et al.,[65] Cappa et al.,[30] and Mishra & Chandra [55].
Following the sensory comparison triangle test, according to the results, the panelists could not define
differences biscuits characteristics (color, taste, texture) between pairs of 11% PH and control biscuits.
So appropriate high protein biscuits with soy protein concentrate discover in the denatured 11% level
soy protein supplement, with less excessive characteristic change than the control biscuits. Furthermore,
it is necessary to reformulate the biscuits formulation to produce biscuits with higher protein contents
with similar physical characteristics (color, taste, texture) found in available biscuits.
4. Conclusion
The effect of adding undenatured and denatured soy concentrate on the formulation of high-protein
biscuits compared to the control biscuit in this work. The hardness of biscuits increased by the increased
on the addition of soy concentrated under two circumstances toward the higher concentration of biscuits.
The preheated treatment of the soy concentrate was not optimal due to the partially changed protein
structure. Another protein structure still interacted with other protein sources in the heat process, leading
to a hardener biscuit. By the experimental descriptive method, the macrostructure analysis showed that
increasing the soy protein addition to the biscuits decreased the pore's structure, leading to dense biscuits.
According to the Df value of biscuit pores, adding soy protein to the biscuit decreased the Df value. The
non-preheated and preheated soy concentrate (11 – 15%) used in the biscuit formulation did not
significantly affect the biscuit color. However, they significantly affected the taste and texture of the
biscuit since panelists found differences between the pair of biscuits—the best-preheated treatment
found in 11% soy resulting porous structure with great texture. According to the triangle test, the
panelists could not define the pair of biscuits at 11% PH and control. Generally, from this study, further
research of preheating treatment on soy protein added to biscuit formulation is required to reach better
quality biscuits.
Reference
[1] Loveday S M 2019 Food Proteins: Technological, Nutritional, and Sustainability Attributes of
Traditional and Emerging Proteins Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 10
[2] Foegeding E A and Davis J P 2011 Food protein functionality: A comprehensive approach Food
Hydrocoll. 25
[3] Tang X and Liu J 2017 A comparative study of partial replacement of wheat flour with whey and
soy protein on rheological properties of dough and cookie quality J. Food Qual.
[4] Lonnie M, Hooker E, Brunstrom J M, Corfe B M, Green M A, Watson A W, Williams E A,
Stevenson E J, Penson S and Johnstone A M 2018 Protein for life: Review of optimal protein
intake, sustainable dietary sources and the effect on appetite in ageing adults Nutrients 10
[5] Ghoshal G and Kaushik P 2020 Development of soymeal fortified cookies to combat malnutrition
Legum. Sci. 2
[6] Mohajan S, Orchy T N and Farzana T 2018 Effect of incorporation of soy flour on functional,
nutritional, and sensory properties of mushroom–moringa-supplemented healthy soup Food Sci.
Nutr. 6
[7] Ermosh L G, Prisuhina N V., Melnikova E V. and Safronova T N 2021 New types of biscuit
products with improved amino acid composition IOP Conference Series: Earth and
Environmental Science
[8] Nogueira A de C, Aquino R K do N de and Steel C J 2022 Empirical rheology of wheat flour
doughs with pea, soybean and whey protein isolates Food Sci. Technol. 42 1–8
[9] Barac M, Stanojevic S, Jovanovic S and Pesic M 2004 Soy protein modification: A review Acta
Period. Technol. 3–16
[10] Wang Z, Li Y, Jiang L, Qi B and Zhou L 2014 Relationship between secondary structure and
surface hydrophobicity of soybean protein isolate subjected to heat treatment J. Chem.
[11] Deak N A, Johnson L A, Lusas E W and Rhee K C 2008 Soy Protein Products, Processing, and
17
Utilization Soybeans: Chemistry, Production, Processing, and Utilization

[12] Guo J, Yang X Q, He X T, Wu N N, Wang J M, Gu W and Zhang Y Y 2012 Limited aggregation
behavior of β-conglycinin and its terminating effect on glycinin aggregation during heating at pH
7.0 J. Agric. Food Chem. 60
[13] Wang J, Burton Navicha W, Na X, Ma W, Xu X, Wu C and Du M 2021 Preheat-induced soy
protein particles with tunable heat stability Food Chem. 336
[14] Wang Y, Sun X S and Wang D 2007 Effects of preheating treatment on thermal property and
adhesion performance of soy protein isolates J. Adhes. Sci. Technol.
[15] Li X, Chen L, Hua Y, Chen Y, Kong X and Zhang C 2020 Effect of preheating-induced
denaturation during protein production on the structure and gelling properties of soybean proteins
Food Hydrocoll.
[16] Murphy P A 2008 Soybean Proteins Soybeans: Chemistry, Production, Processing, and
Utilization (AOCS Press) pp 229–67
[17] Farm Service Agency 2015 Usda commodity requirements
[18] Rifqi M A, Ahmad M, Aila I and Alaiyu F 2019 Pie formula biscuit flour and soy protein isolate
as alternative of high protein snack for toddler Indian J. Public Heal. Res. Dev.
[19] Nogueira A de C and Steel C J 2018 Protein enrichment of biscuits: a review Food Rev. Int.
[20] Feng J and Xiong Y L 2002 Interaction of myofibrillar and preheated soy proteins J. Food Sci.
[21] Misra N N and Tiwari B K 2014 Biscuits Bakery Products Science and Technology: Second
Edition
[22] Zaker Md A and TR G 2012 Effects of Defatted Soy Flour Incorporation on Physical, Sensorial
and Nutritional Properties of Biscuits J. Food Process. Technol.
[23] Di Cairano M, Caruso M C, Galgano F, Favati F, Ekere N and Tchuenbou-Magaia F 2021 Effect
of sucrose replacement and resistant starch addition on textural properties of gluten-free doughs
and biscuits Eur. Food Res. Technol. 247
[24] Filipčev B, Šimurina O and Bodroža-Solarov M 2014 Quality of gingernut type biscuits as
affected by varying fat content and partial replacement of honey with molasses J. Food Sci.
Technol. 51
[25] Kuhn K R, Cavallieri Â L F and da Cunha R L 2010 Cold-set whey protein gels induced by
calcium or sodium salt addition Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 45 348–57
[26] Otsu N 1979 THRESHOLD SELECTION METHOD FROM GRAY-LEVEL HISTOGRAMS.
IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern SMC-9
[27] Uthayakumar R and Gowrisankar A 2014 Generalized Fractal Dimensions in Image Thresholding
Technique Inf. Sci. Lett. 3
[28] Suriya M, Rajput R, Reddy C K, Haripriya S and Bashir M 2017 Functional and physicochemical
characteristics of cookies prepared from Amorphophallus paeoniifolius flour J. Food Sci. Technol.
54
[29] Yang L, Wang S, Zhang W, Zhang H, Guo L, Zheng S and Du C 2022 Effect of black soybean
flour particle size on the nutritional, texture and physicochemical characteristics of cookies Lwt
164 113649
[30] Cappa C, Kelly J D and Ng P K W 2020 Baking performance of 25 edible dry bean powders:
Correlation between cookie quality and rapid test indices Food Chem. 302
[31] Guedes V A, Venturini A C, Carvalho R A and Vanin F M 2022 Manufacture of a Low-Cost
Cookie with High Levels of Soy Flour: Evaluation of Physical and Sensory Properties in Order
to Develop a Healthy and Nutritious Product for Developing Countries SSRN Electron. J.
[32] Nilufer D, Boyacioglu D and Vodovotz Y 2008 Functionality of soymilk powder and its
components in fresh soy bread J. Food Sci. 73
[33] Xie X, Yuan Z, Fu K, An J and Deng L 2022 Effect of Partial Substitution of Flour with
Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor L.) Powder on Dough and Biscuit Properties Foods 11
[34] Korese J K, Chikpah S K, Hensel O, Pawelzik E and Sturm B 2021 Effect of orange-fleshed sweet
potato flour particle size and degree of wheat flour substitution on physical, nutritional, textural
18
and sensory properties of cookies Eur. Food Res. Technol. 247

[35] Singh P, Kumar R, Sabapathy S N and Bawa A S 2008 Functional and edible uses of soy protein
products Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety
[36] Olakanmi S J, Jayas D S and Paliwal J 2022 Implications of Blending Pulse and Wheat Flours on
Rheology and Quality Characteristics of Baked Goods: A Review Foods 11
[37] McWatters K H, Ouedraogo J B, Resurreccion A V A, Hung Y C and Dixon Phillips R 2003
Physical and sensory characteristics of sugar cookies containing mixtures of wheat, fonio
(Digitaria exilis) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) flours Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 38
[38] Singh M and Mohamed A 2007 Influence of gluten-soy protein blends on the quality of reduced
carbohydrates cookies LWT 40
[39] Guo X, Sun X, Zhang Y, Wang R and Yan X 2018 Interactions between soy protein hydrolyzates
and wheat proteins in noodle making dough Food Chem. 245
[40] Maforimbo E, Skurray G, Uthayakumaran S and Wrigley C 2008 Incorporation of soy proteins
into the wheat-gluten matrix during dough mixing J. Cereal Sci. 47
[41] Ma W, Wang T, Wang J, Wu D, Wu C and Du M 2020 Enhancing the thermal stability of soy
proteins by preheat treatment at lower protein concentration Food Chem. 306
[42] Zhang B, Qiao D, Zhao S, Lin Q, Wang J and Xie F 2021 Starch-based food matrices containing
protein: Recent understanding of morphology, structure, and properties Trends Food Sci. Technol.
114
[43] Ruan Z, Zhang C, Sun-Waterhouse D, Li B sheng and Li D dan 2019 Chiffon Cakes Made Using
Wheat Flour With/Without Substitution by Highland Barley Powder or Mung Bean Flour:
Correlations Among Ingredient Heat Absorption Enthalpy, Batter Rheology, and Cake Porosity
Food Bioprocess Technol. 12
[44] Nicole T Z H, Nichelle T S, Elizabeth T E and Yuliarti O 2021 Formulation of functional crackers
enriched with fermented soybean (tempeh) paste: rheological and microstructural properties
Futur. Foods 4 100050
[45] Ngadi M O, Kassama L S and Raghavan G S V 2001 Porosity and pore size distribution in cooked
meat patties containing soy protein Can. Biosyst. Eng. / Le Genie des Biosyst. au Canada 43 317–
24
[46] Rathnayake H A, Navaratne S B and Navaratne C M 2018 Porous Crumb Structure of Leavened
Baked Products Int. J. Food Sci. 2018
[47] Jaques V A J, Plessis A Du, Zemek M, Šalplachta J, Stubianová Z, Zikmund T and Kaiser J 2021
Review of porosity uncertainty estimation methods in computed tomography dataset Meas. Sci.
Technol. 32
[48] Gonzales-Barron U and Butler F 2008 Fractal texture analysis of bread crumb digital images Eur.
Food Res. Technol. 226
[49] Andoyo R, Dianti Lestari V, Mardawati E and Nurhadi B 2018 Fractal Dimension Analysis of
Texture Formation of Whey Protein-Based Foods Int. J. Food Sci. 2018
[50] Gelb L D, Graham A L, Mertz A M and Koenig P H 2019 On the permeability of colloidal gels
Phys. Fluids 31
[51] Jungblut S, Joswig J O and Eychmüller A 2019 Diffusion- and reaction-limited cluster
aggregation revisited Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 21
[52] Rahimi J, Baur J and Singh A 2020 Digital imaging as a tool to study the structure of porous
baked foods J. Cereal Sci. 95
[53] Kouhsari F, Saberi F, Kowalczewski P Ł, Lorenzo J M and Kieliszek M 2022 Effect of the various
fats on the structural characteristics of the hard dough biscuit LWT 159
[54] Sharif M K, Sharif H R and Nasir M 2017 Sensory evaluation and consumer acceptability. Handb.
food Sci. Technol. 361-386.
[55] Mishra N and Chandra R 2012 Development of functional biscuit from soy flour &rice bran Int.
J. Agric. Food Sci. 2 14–20
[56] Mohsen S M, Fadel H H M, Bekhit M A, Edris A E and Ahmed M Y S 2009 Effect of substitution
19
of soy protein isolate on aroma volatiles, chemical composition and sensory quality of wheat
cookies Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 44
[57] Olakanmi S J, Jayas D S and Paliwal J 2022 Implications of Blending Pulse and Wheat Flours on
Rheology and Quality Characteristics of Baked Goods: A Review Foods 11
[58] Asefa B, Assefa H, Girma G, Tsehanew H and Shemsadin F 2017 The Physicochemical and
Sensory Characteristic of Cookies Baked from Wheat Flour and Mango Pulp Food Sci. Qual.
Manag. 65
[59] Dhingra S and Jood S 2004 Effect of flour blending on functional, baking and organoleptic
characteristics of bread Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 39
[60] Bijlwan M, Naik B, Sharma D, Singh A and Kumar V 2019 Recent developments in dough based
bakery products: A mini review ~ 654 ~ Pharma Innov. J. 8
[61] Tangyu M, Muller J, Bolten C J and Wittmann C 2019 Fermentation of plant-based milk
alternatives for improved flavour and nutritional value Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 103
[62] Kamble D B and Rani S 2020 Bioactive components, in vitro digestibility, microstructure and
application of soybean residue (okara): a review Legum. Sci. 2
[63] Wang B, Zhang Q, Zhang N, Bak K H, Soladoye O P, Aluko R E, Fu Y and Zhang Y 2021
Insights into formation, detection and removal of the beany flavor in soybean protein Trends Food
Sci. Technol. 112 336–47
[64] Learning B and Choi S E 2014 Chapter 3 Sensory evaluation Food Sci. An Ecol. Approach
[65] Soni N, Kulkarni A S and Patel L 2018 Studies on development of high protein cookies ~ 439 ~
Int. J. Chem. Stud.
20

Huda_2023_IOP_Conf._Ser.__Earth_Environ._Sci._1230_012166

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Huda_2023_IOP_Conf._Ser.__Earth_Environ._Sci._1230_012166

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Huda_2023_IOP_Conf._Ser.__Earth_Environ._Sci._1230_012166

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IOP Conference Series: Earth and

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- The formulation of alternative gluten-free

This content was downloaded from IP address 114.122.111.118 on 13/02/2024 at 14:54

The effect of modified (preheated) soybean concentrate

S Huda, Y Taira, S Rahimah, and S Nurhasanah

Figure 1. Mechanism of Aggregate Formation in Soy Protein (Glycinin and

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Preparation of denatured soy concentrate powder

2.2. Formulation of biscuit

2.3. Baking procedure

2.4. Texture (hardness) of biscuit

2.5. Image analysis of biscuit

2.6. Sensory evaluation

2.7. Statistical analysis

3. Result and discussion

3.1. Texture (hardness) of biscuit

Hardness of Biscuit Group A

Control NPH 11 NPH 13 NPH 15

Figure 2. Graphic of peak force (hardness) from group a (non-

Hardness of Biscuit Group B

Figure 3. Graphic of peak force (hardness) from group b

Group B 818.49 1512.17 1378.86 1750.16

Time (s) Control 11 13 15

Group B 0.16 0.18 0.17 0.20

Hardness (Average) of Biscuits from Group A and

Figure 4. Diagram of average biscuits hardness data from group a (non-

Table 4. Average of biscuits hardness data (undenatured or non-preheated/NPH)

3.2. Image analysis of biscuit

3.2.1. Descriptive analysis and porosity area of biscuits

Porosity Area of Group A and Group B Biscuits

Average Size of Biscuits Porosity

Figure 7. Diagram of average size of biscuits porosity from group a (non-

Figure 9. Fractal dimension (value) of biscuits pores (size = 1200 x 120

Table 6. Average of fractal dimension (Df) of non-preheated (NPH) and modified,

Sample Fractal Dimension

3.3. Sensory evaluation

Triangle Test of NPH and PH Biscuits

Color Taste Texture Minimum Corrcet Responses α =0,10)

Utilization Soybeans: Chemistry, Production, Processing, and Utilization

and sensory properties of cookies Eur. Food Res. Technol. 247

You might also like