Premium
Chickpea Bread, a Low Glycemic Index Bread Alternative
Author(s) -
Mejia Sonia Blanco,
Ireland Christopher,
Kendall Cyril W.C.,
Sievenpiper John L.,
Wolever Thomas M.S.,
Vuksan Vladimir V.V.,
Pencharz Paul B.,
Jenkins David J.A.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.30.1_supplement.893.11
Subject(s) - palatability , food science , bran , glycemic index , gluten , whole wheat , wheat flour , glycemic , bread making , dietary fiber , chemistry , biology , microbiology and biotechnology , raw material , insulin , organic chemistry
Background Pulses are low glycemic index (GI) foods that have been found to have beneficial effects on blood glucose control and other health factors. Due to widespread bread consumption and the low availability of low GI breads for individuals with diabetes, there is the need to develop low GI palatable breads that meet the needs of these individuals. Objective To develop a low GI pulse based bread with acceptable palatability. Methods We developed six different breads, a control white flour bread (C bread), a bread made out of 100% chickpea flour (T bread) and four others made with white flour and added wheat bran and/or gluten to isolate the effect of protein/fiber on GI. Their macronutrient composition was analyzed. These breads were then tested for their GI response and palatability and were compared to the C bread in healthy participants using student's t ‐test. Results GI and palatability (mean ± SEM) for the test breads were as follow: T bread 80.1 ± 5.3, 63.6 ± 8.0; control bread with added wheat bran and gluten (C+ bread) 90.5 ± 6.3, 58.7 ± 10.0; control bread with added wheat bran and extra gluten (CB3XG bread) 82.7 ± 6.4, 50.4 ± 10.2; control bread with extra gluten (C3XG bread) 78.7 ± 25.6, 51.5 ± 9.9; and control bread with wheat bran (CB bread) 102.1±25.5, 64.9 ± 8.1. When compared to C bread (GI = 100 ± 0), we observed a statistical significantly lower GI in T bread (GI = 80.1 ± 5.3, p < 0.01), CB3XG bread (GI = 82.7 ± 6.4, p < 0.05), and C3XG bread (GI = 78.7 ± 8.1, p < 0.05). Palatability was not statistically different between C bread and other breads. Limitations We developed and analyzed a single pulse bread (T bread) and with no dose effect measurement. GI test was done solely in healthy individuals. Conclusion T bread had satisfactorily GI and palatability, but further work remains to make it sufficiently palatable for general use. Support or Funding Information Saskatchewan Pulse Growers and Loblaw Companies Limited