Home Effect of varietal differences on the oral processing behavior and bolus properties of cooked rice
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Effect of varietal differences on the oral processing behavior and bolus properties of cooked rice

  • Priyanka Sethupathy , S. K. Sivakamasundari , Jeyan. A. Moses and Chinnaswamy Anandharamakrishnan ORCID logo EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: September 25, 2020

Abstract

This research explored the impact of in-vivo oral processing on the bolus properties of three rice varieties [white ponni (WP), mappillai samba (MS), and basmati (B)] that were selected based on variations in the amylose content. The amylose and dry matter content of the WP, MS, and B were 4.67, 7.48, and 13.8(%) and 69.57, 60.09, and 70.47(%), respectively. Mastication features (bite-size, chewing time, and chew cycles), bolus properties (particle size distribution, bolus moisture content, rheology, and starch hydrolysis), time-dependent bolus features (rate of incorporation of saliva and saliva content) and, temporal dominance of sensation (TDS) of cooked rice were studied. Results confirmed the significance of oral processing on various bolus characteristics. Moreover, a pronounced correlation between the morphology of rice varieties and mastication features was observed. The structure and textural characteristics of the different rice varieties (MS, WP, B) showed considerable effects on the consumption time (25.7 s, 22.2 s, 17.8 s) and chewing cycles (34, 31, 23). Rate of saliva incorporation was relatively lesser for MS as compared with WP and B. Solid loss followed the trends WP > MS > B. The total starch content of cooked rice boluseswas WP (82.69 ± 0.01%), MS (79.49 ± 0.01%), and B (71.74 ± 0.01%). Further, texture – TDS and flavor – TDS of all varieties were found to be strongly dependent on textural attributes, composition, and oro-sensory perception. This study provides a significant understanding of the oral processing behavior of rice and its bolus, considering the effect of variations in amylose content, texture, and morphology.


Corresponding author: Chinnaswamy Anandharamakrishnan, Computational Modeling and Nanoscale Processing Unit, Indian Institute of Food Processing Technology (IIFPT), Ministry of Food Processing Industries, Government of India, Thanjavur, 613005, Tamil Nadu, India, E-mail:

  1. Author contributions: Priyanka Sethupathy and S.K. Sivakamasundarai: Data curation, formal analysis, writing original draft; Jeyan. A. Moses: Methodology, supervision, review and editing, and Anandharamakrishnan Chinnaswamy: Conceptualization, project administration, resources, review, and editing.

  2. Research funding: None declared.

  3. Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

References

1. Sethupathy, P, Moses, JA, Anandharamakrishnan, C. Food oral processing and tribology: instrumental approaches and emerging applications. Food Rev Int 2020:1–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/87559129.2019.1710749.Search in Google Scholar

2. Chen, J. Food oral processing: mechanisms and implications of food oral destruction. Trends Food Sci Technol 2015;45:222–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2015.06.012.Search in Google Scholar

3. Ranawana, V, Leow, MKS, Henry, CJK. Mastication effects on the glycaemic index: impact on variability and practical implications. Eur J Clin Nutr 2014;68:137. https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2013.231.Search in Google Scholar

4. Gao, J, Lin, S, Jin, X, Wang, Y, Ying, J, Dong, Z, et al. In vitro digestion of bread: how is it influenced by the bolus characteristics?. J Texture Stud 2019;50:257–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtxs.12391.Search in Google Scholar

5. Freitas, D, Le Feunteun, S. Oro-gastro-intestinal digestion of starch in white bread, wheat-based and gluten-free pasta: unveiling the contribution of human salivary $α$-amylase. Food Chem 2019;274:566–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.09.025.Search in Google Scholar

6. Aguayo-Mendoza, MG, Ketel, EC, van der Linden, E, Forde, CG, Piqueras-Fiszman, B, Stieger, M. Oral processing behavior of drinkable, spoonable and chewable foods is primarily determined by rheological and mechanical food properties. Food Qual Prefer 2019;71:87–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.06.006.Search in Google Scholar

7. Pineau, N, Schlich, P, Cordelle, S, Mathonnière, C, Issanchou, S, Imbert, A, et al. Temporal Dominance of Sensations: construction of the TDS curves and comparison with time–intensity. Food Qual Prefer 2009;20:450–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2009.04.005.Search in Google Scholar

8. Rizo, A, Jimenez-Pérez, I, Camacho-Garcia, A, Fiszman, S, Pérez-Soriano, P, Tárrega, A. Impact of texture TDS and flavour TDS tasks and of chocolate-chip biscuit characteristics on oral processing features. Food Qual Prefer 2019;76:109–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.04.005.Search in Google Scholar

9. Di Monaco, R, Su, C, Masi, P, Cavella, S. Temporal dominance of sensations: a review. Trends Food Sci Technol 2014;38:104–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2014.04.007.Search in Google Scholar

10. Saikrishna, A, Dutta, S, Subramanian, V, Moses, JA, Anandharamakrishnan, C. Ageing of rice: a review. J Cereal Sci 2018;81:161–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcs.2018.04.009.Search in Google Scholar

11. Prabhakaran, B, Moses, JA. Pasting characteristics of raw rice flour obtained from various mill types. Adv Life Sci 2016;5:1605–9.Search in Google Scholar

12. Moongngarm, A, Bronlund, JE, Grigg, N, Sriwai, N. Chewing behavior and bolus properties as affected by different rice types. Int J Med Biol Sci 2012;6:51–56.Search in Google Scholar

13. Jain, A, Rao, SM, Sethi, S, Ramesh, A, Tiwari, S, Mandal, SK, et al. Effect of cooking on amylose content of rice. Eur J Exp Biol 2012;2:385–8.Search in Google Scholar

14. Oladiran, DA, Emmambux, MN, de Kock, HL. Extrusion cooking of cassava-soy flour with 200 g/kg wheat bran promotes slower oral processing during consumption of the instant porridge and higher derived satiety. LWT 2018;97:778–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2018.07.068.Search in Google Scholar

15. van Eck, A, Hardeman, N, Karatza, N, Fogliano, V, Scholten, E, Stieger, M. Oral processing behavior and dynamic sensory perception of composite foods: toppings assist saliva in bolus formation. Food Qual Prefer 2018;71:497–509.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.05.009.Search in Google Scholar

16. Prasad Reddy, MN, Padma Ishwarya, S, Anandharamakrishnan, C. Nanoencapsulation of roasted coffee bean oil in whey protein wall system through nanospray drying. J Food Process Preserv 2019;43:e13893. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.13893.Search in Google Scholar

17. Peyron, M-A, Mishellany, A, Woda, A. Particle size distribution of food boluses after mastication of six natural foods. J Dent Res 2004;83:578–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910408300713.Search in Google Scholar

18. Sopade, PA, Gidley, MJ. A rapid in-vitro digestibility assay based on glucometry for investigating kinetics of starch digestion. Starch-Stärke 2009;61:245–55. https://doi.org/10.1002/star.200800102.Search in Google Scholar

19. Cheng, K-C, Chen, S-H, Yeh, A-I. Physicochemical properties and in vitro digestibility of rice after parboiling with heat moisture treatment. J Cereal Sci 2019;85:98–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcs.2018.11.016.Search in Google Scholar

20. Goñi, I, Garcia-Alonso, A, Saura-Calixto, F. A starch hydrolysis procedure to estimate glycemic index. Nutr Res 1997;17:427–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0271-5317(97)00010-9.Search in Google Scholar

21. Suwannaporn, P, Pitiphunpong, S, Champangern, S. Classification of rice amylose content by discriminant analysis of physicochemical properties. Starch-Stärke 2007;59:171–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/star.200600565.Search in Google Scholar

22. Biselli, C, Cavalluzzo, D, Perrini, R, Gianinetti, A, Bagnaresi, P, Urso, S, et al. Improvement of marker-based predictability of Apparent Amylose Content in japonica rice through GBSSI allele mining. Rice 2014;7:1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1939-8433-7-1.Search in Google Scholar

23. Yu, S, Ma, Y, Sun, D-W. Impact of amylose content on starch retrogradation and texture of cooked milled rice during storage. J Cereal Sci 2009;50:139–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcs.2009.04.003.Search in Google Scholar

24. Kaur, S, Panesar, PS, Bera, MB, Kumari, S. Physicochemical, textural, pasting, and in vitro digestion properties of some basmati and non-basmati rice cultivars. Int J Food Prop 2014;17:1055–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/10942912.2011.642444.Search in Google Scholar

25. Gujral, HS, Kumar, V. Effect of accelerated aging on the physicochemical and textural properties of brown and milled rice. J Food Eng 2003;59:117–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0260-8774(02)00438-7.Search in Google Scholar

26. Krishnanunni, K, Senthilvel, P, Ramaiah, S, Anbarasu, A. Study of chemical composition and volatile compounds along with in-vitro assay of antioxidant activity of two medicinal rice varieties: karungkuravai and Mappilai samba. J Food Sci Technol 2015;52:2572–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-014-1292-z.Search in Google Scholar

27. Kohyama, K, Ohtsubo, K, Toyoshima, H, Shiozawa, K. Electromyographic study on cooked rice with different amylose contents. J Texture Stud 1998;29:101–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4603.1998.tb00156.x.Search in Google Scholar

28. Pematilleke, N, Kaur, M, Adhikari, B, Torley, P. Influence of meat texture on oral processing and bolus formation. J Food Eng 2020;83:110038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2020.110038.Search in Google Scholar

29. Wu, P, Deng, R, Wu, X, Wang, Y, Dong, Z, Dhital, S, et al. In vitro gastric digestion of cooked white and brown rice using a dynamic rat stomach model. Food Chem 2017;237:1065–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.05.081.Search in Google Scholar

30. Syahariza, ZA, Yong, HY. Evaluation of rheological and textural properties of texture-modified rice porridge using tapioca and sago starch as thickener. J Food Meas Charact 2017;11:1586–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-017-9538-x.Search in Google Scholar

31. Le Bleis, F, Chaunier, L, Della Valle, G, Panouille, M, Reguerre, A-L. Physical assessment of bread destructuration during chewing. Food Res Int 2013;50:308–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2012.10.042.Search in Google Scholar

32. Chen, X, Zhang, X, Wang, B, Chen, P, Xu, Y, Du, X. Investigation of water migration and its impacts on eating qualities of black rice during cooking process. J Cereal Sci 2019;89:102810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcs.2019.102810.Search in Google Scholar

33. Sivakamasundari, SK, Moses, JA, Anandharamakrishnan, C. Effect of parboiling methods on the physicochemical characteristics and glycemic index of rice varieties. J Food Meas Charact 2020:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-020-00551-9.Search in Google Scholar

34. Kumar, A, Sahoo, U, Baisakha, B, Okpani, OA, Ngangkham, U, Parameswaran, C, et al. Resistant starch could be decisive in determining the glycemic index of rice cultivars. J Cereal Sci 2018;79:348–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcs.2017.11.013.Search in Google Scholar

35. Sethupathy, P, Suriyamoorthy, P, Moses, JA, Anandharamakrishnan, C. Physical, sensory, in-vitro starch digestibility and glycemic index of granola bars prepared using sucrose alternatives. Int J Food Sci Technol 2020;55:348–356. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.14312.Search in Google Scholar

36. Anuprialashmi, KS, Malarmathy, M, Priya, P, Loganathan, K, Mohamed Niyas, M, Shivashakthivel, T, et al. Studies on biochemical characterization of traditional rice varieties. Pharma Innov J 2019;8:314–16.Search in Google Scholar

37. Upadhyay, R, Brossard, N, Chen, J. Mechanisms underlying astringency: introduction to an oral tribology approach. J Phys D Appl Phys 2016;49:104003. https://doi.org/10.1088/0022-3727/49/10/104003.Search in Google Scholar

38. Bett-Garber, KL, Lea, JM, Champagne, ET, McClung, AM. Whole-grain rice flavor associated with assorted bran colors. J Sensory Stud 2012;27:78–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459x.2011.00368.x.Search in Google Scholar

39. Bhattacharjee, P, Singhal, RS, Kulkarni, PR. Basmati rice: a review. Int J Food Sci Technol 2002;37:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2621.2002.00541.x.Search in Google Scholar


Supplementary material

The online version of this article offers supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.1515/ijfe-2020-0097).


Received: 2020-05-01
Accepted: 2020-09-14
Published Online: 2020-09-25

© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 12.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/ijfe-2020-0097/html
Scroll to top button