Adding Texture Appeal to Healthy Baked Goods:

A Systematic Approach to Satisfying Consumer Preferences

Alejandro J. Perez-Gonzalez
Senior Associate, Systems Design & Measurement
National Starch Food Innovation
10 Finderne Avenue
Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807
2
Adding Texture Appeal to Healthy Baked Goods:
A Systematic Approach to Satisfying Consumer Preferences
Consumers love rich, indulgent baked goods. They enjoy the entic-
ing mouth feel of full-fat products, and they appreciate the textures
obtained with traditional ingredients and recipes.
Today, however, theres a growing movement toward healthy
products and bakery items with clean-label credentials. People are
reading ingredient statements, and avoiding products whose labels
list lots of chemical-sounding ingredient names. Theyre seeking
out baked goods with lower fat, lower calories, whole grains, and
gluten-free ingredients.
This trend is no longer conned to health-food stores. It has moved
into major brands and mainstream supermarkets. In 2009 sales
of foods and beverages labeled organic, which has the strictest
guidelines in the clean-label segment, grew 5.1%, to $24.8 billion,
claiming nearly 4% of the total food market. Mass market retailers
accounted for 54% of organic food sales.
1

Some experts predict that by 2017 healthy foods, including
organic, natural, and clean-label products, will make up 23% of total
food sales. This represents a tremendous market opportunity for
market for healthier food, including baked goods.
So the question is not whether to create healthy baked goods, but
how to give them higher consumer appeal. When producers refor-
mulate bakery items for lower fat, higher ber content, less sugar,
or to make them gluten-free, they often wind up with unappealing
textures. The result: buyer resistance.
To make the situation more difcult, ingredient changes often
require modications in the manufacturing process. This can lead to
higher costs and less efcient production.
This paper shows how National Starch Food Innovations systematic
approach to texture design can prevent these problems. National
has done extensive evaluation of the many sensory properties that
characterize a food and has translated them into precise, repeatable
attributes. Using our systematic sensory analysis tools and our
DIAL-IN

texture mapping technology, we were able to formulate

healthy products that we could predict had higher consumer appeal
in three major baked goods categories:
Reduced-fat brownies. Reduced-fat dry-mix brownies that
closely match the eating qualities of their full-fat counterparts.
White bread with higher ber from resistant starch. Fiber-
rich, reduced-calorie products that process normally, remain
moist, and avoid gritty or mealy textures.
Gluten-free cookies and mufns. Doughs with properties that
machine well and produce a texture that is moist and chewy
instead of dry and crumbly.
We will describe key aspects of our approach in three case studies
on these products. A summary will conclude this paper.
Case Study 1: Reduced-Fat Brownies
Challenges Solutions
Complex ingredient statements:
Hydroco||oids (anthan and guar
gums, etc.) substituted for fats
Sugar b|ends
Clean, simple label:
Fat replaced by specialty wheat
our
Suar blends unnecessary
Less chewy, more dense and sticky Closely mimics full-fat textures
More energy-intensive baking due
to additional water content
Specialty our has improved
water manaement properties
Traditional full-fat brownies use butter, margarine, shortening, or
similar ingredients and traditional ours to achieve a palate-pleasing
texture prole. Based on our systematic approach to texture map-
ping, Nationa| Starch Food lnnovation was ab|e to use our HOMF-
CRAFT

Create 765 specialty our to create prototypes for dry-mix

chocolate brownies that use 25% and 60% less fat than standard
formulations, yet exhibit little change in perceived textures.
We started by selecting several full-fat brownies as benchmark prod-
ucts. Using descriptive sensory analysis, we characterized the most
signicant textural attributes in their sensory proles, creating a texture
lexicon or Texicon for that particular application. These included
chewiness, fatty mouth-coating, rst-bite hardness, and seven other
key attributes. We measured and quantied these characteristics.
We then compared different prototypes of fat-reduced brownies to
nd out what gaps existed between them and the benchmark prod-
ucts. Many formulations for reduced-fat products substitute hydro-
colloids, such as xanthan and guar gums, for the shortening powder
that gives the benchmark product much of its sensory prole.
Our measurements showed that these reduced-lat recipes de-
creased the chewiness and mouth-coating while making the brown-
ies denser and stickier. They also contained different sugar blends
to increase their taste appeal. All of this led to a complex ingredient
statement, clearly undesirable in a healthy-food product. In addition,
these prototype formulas had poor water management properties
which affected their batter behavior and baking performance.
Based on our analysis of desirable attributes in a brownie, we chose
HOMFCR/FT

Create 765 specialty our to replace much of the

far more expensive shortening powder in the full-fat dry mix. We
used this approach to create prototype low-fat versions with overall
reductions in fat content of 25% and 60%.
Comparison of Brownie Prototypes
The plot on page 3
2
represents the sensory properties of the original
recipe (b|ue out|ine) as compared to our winning prototypes. lt dem-
onstrates how c|ose|y our recipes (green: o0 |ess lat, red: 25 |ess
fat) mimic the original texture prole across 10 key sensory attributes.
1. Organic Trade /ssociation website www.ota.com/organic/mt/business.htm|. Figures quoted lrom June 2010 study.
2. Not all details are shown, or shown to scale, to protect proprietary information.
3
Sensory testing showed the 25% fat-reduced fudge brownie to
be similar to the control full-fat brownie on most tested attributes,
dillering on|y s|ight|y on "Chewiness. Other especia||y important
factors, such as density and stickiness, were close matches.
In short, our scientic approach to texture design allows producers
to cut fat by 25% to 60% and produce a dry-mix brownie that
consumers would nd very appealing in both eating quality and
ingredient statement, and that will be practical for bakers to
incorporate into their formulas.
Case Study 2: High-Fiber, Resistant-Starch Bread
Challenges Solutions
Traditional bers require more
hydration than ours, causing
processing issues:
Reduced machinabi|ity: dough
is sticky
/dditiona| moisture content
increases baking time
Flours and starches with hber
from natural resistant starch
need less water:
Low hydration capacity: impact
on processing minimal
Lower moisture content means
no increase in bake time
Decreased quality of cell structure,
volume, color
Cell structure, volume, color
maintained
Finished products are dry, mealy,
gritty, and their avor changes
Texture and avor closely
resemble benchmarks
High-hber breads are increasing|y popu|ar as a way to reduce ca|oric
intake and carbohydrate consumption. Typically they are created by
replacing some of the wheat our in a bread recipe with ber. This
produces a change in texture, avor, color, and the cell structure of
the nished product that many consumers nd unattractive. It also
changes the dough properties and hence the processing character-
istics of the product.
Based on our analysis of the sensory characteristics of the benchmark
white bread, we were ab|e to use Nationa|s Hi-maize

260 starch to
create a high-ber prototype that mimicked the benchmarks most
important textural attributes. Moreover, our prototype eliminated the
process challenges that accompany the use of other sources of ber.
Finding a solution to the processing difculties of ber and other
healthy ingredients is especially important to food processors.
When incorporated into a recipe, ber needs more water than the
our it replaces. This turns the dough sticky, making it hard to pro-
cess. That extra moisture must then be removed by increasing the
bake time, which slows the process and raises energy consumption.
Fven with specia| hand|ing to overcome these cha||enges the resu|ts
are sub-optima|. Ce|| structure (the hne, even|y distributed bubb|e pat-
tern in bread) is compromised. The loaves are lower in volume, with a
dry, mealy, even gritty texture, and both avor and color are affected.
By contrast, Hi-maize 2o0 starch de|ivers Type 2 natura| resistant
starch derived from high-amylose corn that behaves very similarly
to white our. The comparison below shows how well bread made
with Hi-maize 2o0 matches up with the benchmar| contro| product
in terms of volume, cell structure, color, and texture.
The structure of this clean-label ingredient delivers valuable sensory
attributes, including higher crumb moistness and an even, non-gritty
texture. It is also neutral in taste.
Its small particle size helps deliver valuable sensory attributes,
including higher crumb moisture content for a non-gritty texture.
It is also neutral in taste with a compared with other bers.
In this case our sensory mapping and textural analysis led to the
conc|usion that by using Hi-maize

260 starch we could create a

prototype with a texture that more closely matched a traditional
white bread benchmark than other ber options. Techniques such
as measuring cell structure as an objective, quantiable physical
10
8
6
4
2
0
Fatty/greasy mouthcoat
Chewiness
Hardness 1st bite
And seven other
key attributes
Full-fat brownie
60% fat reduction
25% fat reduction
Hi-maize

260 Starch
(5g ber/serving excellent source of ber)
Control
4
characteristic allowed us to optimize such parameters as the
hardness of the bread.
ln addition, because Hi-maize 2o0 starch needs |ess hydration than
other ber-rich ingredients, the product can be manufactured with
minimal process changes and without extended bake times.
Case Study 3: Gluten-Free Cookies and Mufns
Challenges Solutions
Poor dough or batter properties
and nished product characteristics:
Lower vo|ume
Poor ce|| structure
Specialty our products enable
enhanced dough and batter
properties and hnished product
characteristics:
Improved volume
etter cell structure
Ingredient statements are long and
complex
Simple, clean label
Finished products are dry, crumbly,
and grainy
Moist, chewy hnished products
One in 1 /mericans sullers lrom ce|iac disease, a severe into|er-
ance for the gluten found in wheat, barley, oats, and rye. Many
other people have varying degrees of gluten sensitivity. But when
food companies try to address the resulting demand for gluten-free
baked goods, they face problems in formulating products that can
be handled in traditional manufacturing processes and have the
appealing texture and appearance that consumers want.
Common issues in gluten-free bakery products include reduced
volume, lack of an even cell structure, and a dry, crumbly, grainy
texture that consumers nd unattractive. This is especially unattract-
ive in items such as cookies and mufns.
To overcome these barriers to consumer acceptance, National
Starch Food Innovation experts employed our systematic approach
to texture mapping to further characterize the sensory attributes
which were most important in coo|ies and mulhns. Our bench-
marks were traditional wheat-based products.
Based on the benchmarks, our texture mapping dened the sensory
proles of popular wheat-based products. The chart below compares
the benchmark products with both the commercial gluten-free
alternatives available at the time of the study, and the prototypes
created by National.
As the Texture Mapping diagram shows, the benchmark products
displayed smooth, moist, chewy textures. In contrast, both commer-
cial gluten-free products had signicantly drier, more crumbly, and
less moist and smooth proles.
Our g|uten-lree prototypes, on the other hand, ran|ed very c|ose to
the benchmark products in texture, mouth feel, and moistness. Using
DIAL-IN texture technology to dene important textural attributes of
the benchmar|s, we were ab|e to use Design ol Fperiments (DOF)
techniques to optimize our products in two key areas:
Process improvements for enhanced moisture management,
dough consistency, and machinability
Volume, cell structure, and textural sensory attributes in the
nal product
This systematic process led us to design National Starch Food In-
novations HOMFCR/FT

Create CF 10 and HOMFCR/FT

Create
GF 20 ours as the right gluten-free our replacements to meet
the demands of both bakery manufacturers and consumers. Both
products are blends of proprietary rice and tapioca ours that do
not contain wheat gluten.
A Systematic Approach to Formulation
National Starch Food Innovations expertise in texture design is built
on a systematic approach to formulating new products. In the three
cases covered here, we:
ldentihed benchmar| product(s) in the category
Measured the teture proh|e ol benchmar|(s) and current
solutions
Dened gaps in texture, processing, and measured characteris-
tics between existing technologies and benchmarks
Determined formulation and ingredient approaches to texture
design
Identied processing and functionality hurdles
Used formulation science expertise to design prototype formulas
Described the resulting solutions using sensory and instrumental
tools
Fnab|ed industry adoption through app|ications epertise
Our so|utions oller lormu|ations with a high degree ol corre|ation
between desired sensory attributes and the nished products. This
is especially important in creating high-quality, healthy baked goods
with wide consumer appeal. By combining formulation expertise
with too|s such as a sensory Teicon and DOF, we have created
a highly effective approach to overcoming the challenges facing
manufacturers in this market.
National Starch GF Cookie
Prototype
Commercial Cookie Benchmark
with Gluten
Commercial Cookie Benchmark
Gluten-Free
National Starch GF Muffin
Prototype
Commercial Muffin Benchmark
with Gluten
Commercial Muffin Benchmark
Gluten-Free
DRY
CRUMBLY
S
M
O
O
T
H
G
R
A
I
N
Y
MOIST
CHEWY
C M
M
C
Describing the Solution: Texture Mapping
National Starch Food Innovation (US)
10 Finderne Avenue
Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807-3300
Directory Assistance
Te|: 1-8oo-9o1-N/TL (o285)
Fax: 1-609-655-4402
Internet: www.foodinnovation.com
National Starch Food Innovation (Canada)
106 Summerlea Road
Brampton, Ontario LoT 4X
Toll free: 1-866-414-1263
Tel: 1-905-799-2009
Fax: 1-905-454-2526
Unleashing the power of starchology

The information given and the recommendations made herein are based on our research and are believed to be accurate but no guarantee of their accuracy is made. In every
case we urge and recommend that purchasers before using any product in full scale production make their own tests to determine to their own satisfaction whether the prod-
uct is of acceptable quality and is suitable for their particular purposes under their own operating conditions. No representative of ours has any authority to waive or change the
foregoing provisions but, subject to such provisions, our engineers are available to assist purchasers in adapting our products to their needs and to the circumstances prevailing
in their business. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to imply the nonexistence of any relevant patents or to constitute a permission, inducement or recommendation
to practice any invention covered by any patent, without the authority from the owner of this patent.
2011 National Starch LLC