Impact of Modified and Native Starch on the Quality Attributes of Gluten-Free Bread

Abstract

This study investigated the influence of various native and modified starches on the quality and staling behaviour of gluten-free bread. Four starch types: native wheat starch, cross-linked tapioca starch, fractionated native potato starch (FPS), and acetylated potato starch (Amylacetate) were evaluated by incorporating them into a standardized gluten-free bread formulation as the main starch source. Several gluten-free bread quality parameters were assessed, including pasting properties (RVA), gelatinisation and retrogradation characteristics (DSC), specific loaf volume, baking loss, crumb colour (L*a*b*), texture profile analysis (TPA), crumb and crust moisture content, and sensory perception through a ranked attribute test.

The results demonstrated that the type of starch significantly affected all measured bread quality attributes. Wheat starch produced loaves with the highest specific volume and showed balanced textural properties with moderate firmness and cohesiveness. Amylacetate yielded similar texture and retrogradation behaviour to wheat, with lower firmness and retrogradation enthalpy than FPS, but its higher paste viscosity likely inhibited gas expansion during baking, resulting in lower loaf volume. FPS, despite achieving high specific volume, exhibited the most unfavourable textural qualities: high crumb firmness, low cohesiveness, and high retro-gradation enthalpy, indicating rapid staling due to amylopectin recrystallization and moisture immobilization. Tapioca starch, while yielding low volume bread, showed excellent resistance to staling, with the lowest crumb firmness and highest cohesiveness, though its unique chewy texture received mixed sensory ratings.

A general correlation was observed between higher retrogradation enthalpy, crumb firmness, dryness, and poor sensory outcomes, supporting the role of amylopectin recrystallization in staling dynamics. However, exceptions such as the increased firmness in Tapioca bread without corresponding retrogradation enthalpy increases, suggested additional staling mechanisms, possibly linked to moisture redistribution or matrix densification. Additionally, Crumb moisture content did not directly correlate with firmness, highlighting that moisture availability for crumb plasticisation, rather than total moisture, influences texture. Overall, the findings underscore the importance of starch physiochemical properties and modification on both initial bread quality and shelf-life performance in gluten-free baking applications.

Popular Abstract

Gluten-free bread has come a long way, but anyone who’s tried baking or buying it knows it’s still a tricky product. Without gluten, the protein that gives regular bread its soft, stretchy, and moist texture, gluten-free bread can easily turn dry, crumbly, or tough. For many people with gluten allergies or intolerances, having tasty, fresh bread isn’t just a luxury it’s a daily necessity. Yet, creating gluten-free bread that stays soft and fresh over time remains a challenge for bakers and food scientists alike.

This study focused on one of the most important ingredients in gluten-free bread: starch. Starch-es take on much of the job gluten normally does, helping bread hold its shape, trap air bubbles, and keep that desirable soft texture. But starches differ widely, some come straight from grains or tubers, while others are chemically modified to improve their performance. Four types of starch were tested: natural wheat starch, two types of potato starch (one chemically modified and one refined to remove larger starch particles), and a special chemically strengthened tapioca starch.

The type of starch used had a huge impact on how the bread turned out! from the size of the loaf and its texture to how quickly it went dry and tough (stale).
Wheat starch naturally produced the biggest and softest loaves. Its balance of softness and firm-ness made for bread that was pleasant to eat fresh and reasonably stable over time.
The chemically modified potato starch helped the bread stay moist and soft longer by slowing down the staling process. However, it made smaller loaves, likely because its thicker, stickier dough limited how much the bread could rise during baking and proofing.
The potato starch, with its bigger particles removed, created bread with a good size however, it came at the cost of disappointing texture. The bread quickly became dry, hard, and crumbly, the opposite of what is wanted for gluten-free bread.

The strengthened tapioca starch had the most unique properties: it made a chewy, springy bread that resisted drying out for longer, never becoming crumbly, but the loaves were smaller and denser. This unique texture split opinions in the taste panel: some loved the springiness, others found it too chewy.

Bread going stale usually happens when starch molecules “tangles up” like roots twisting to-gether, making bread hard and dry. But the tapioca bread hardened even without this “root tan-gling,” suggesting other factors like moisture moving around or the crumb structure tightening also affect staling.

This study provides valuable insights for future research and for bakers and producers aiming to make gluten-free bread softer, fresher, and more enjoyable. Since bread is a daily staple for people with gluten allergies, improving its quality is important. Future efforts combining dif-ferent starches could unlock the ideal balance of loaf size, texture, and shelf life bringing glu-ten-free bread closer than ever to what people really want.

• author: Lund, Marie-Therese
• supervisor: Jeanette Purhagen
• organization: Food Technology and Nutrition (M.Sc.)
• course: KLTM02 20251
• year: 2025
• type: H2 - Master's Degree (Two Years)
• subject: Technology and Engineering; Agriculture and Food Sciences
• keywords: Gluten-free bread, modified starch, native starch, starch retrogradation, bread staling, starch functionality, wheat starch, potato starch, tapioca starch, TPA, DSC, RVA, Food science, sensory evaluation, food engineering nutrition and food chemistry
• language: English
• id: 9196802
• date added to LUP: 2025-06-16 13:27:08
• date last changed: 2025-06-16 13:27:08