Table 1.
Predicted model equations for the three mixture designs indicating the effect of each mixture component a and their interactions on the physical properties and acceptability scores of the gluten-free bread.
| Design b | Predicted Model Equations c | R2adj (%) d | Model (p) e | Lack of Fit (p) e |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Loaf specific volume cm3/g (Y1) | ||||
| A | Y1a = 1.74RF + 1.43PS + 1.57AF + 0.65RF × PS + 1.42PS × AF | 86.79 | 0.002 | 0.281 |
| B | Y1b = 1.83RF + 1.59PS + 2.01BF | 32.61 | 0.069 | 0.017 |
| C | Y1c = 1.72RF + 1.43PS + 1.46QF + 1.11RF × QF + 1.30PS × QF | 80.18 | 0.007 | 0.063 |
| Crumb firmness N (Y2) | ||||
| A | Y2a = 9.88RF + 9.31PS + 4.31AF | 73.62 | 0.001 | 0.749 |
| B | Y2b = 10.19RF + 11.13PS + 22.69BF | 70.82 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| C | Y2c = 8.84RF + 8.97PS + 20.99QF | 83.75 | 0.000 | 0.277 |
| Crumb moisture % (Y3) | ||||
| A | Y3a = 52.28RF + 55.43PS + 53.75AF | 98.19 | 0.000 | 0.137 |
| B | Y3b = 51.59RF + 55.00PS + 52.11BF | 78.63 | 0.000 | 0.014 |
| C | Y3c = 52.56RF + 55.63PS + 54.02QF | 83.17 | 0.000 | 0.461 |
| Appearance acceptability score (Y4) | ||||
| A | Y4a = 8.73RF + 7.71PS + 7.25AF + 2.64RF × PS+ 3.46PS × AF | 8.55 | 0.001 | 0.587 |
| B | Y4b = 9.13RF + 8.13PS + 7.26BF | 78.03 | 0.000 | 0.255 |
| C | Y4c = 8.75RF + 7.73PS + 7.58QF + 1.83RF × PS + 3.67PS × QF | 87.83 | 0.002 | 0.269 |
| Color acceptability score (Y5) | ||||
| A | Y5a = 8.61RF + 7.89PS + 7.77AF + 2.91RF × AF | 66.25 | 0.033 | 0.571 |
| B | Y5b = 8.98RF + 8.07PS + 6.97BF | 79.72 | 0.000 | 0.416 |
| C | Y5c = 8.57RF + 7.91PS + 7.43QF + 3.04RF × QF | 73.85 | 0.016 | 0.237 |
| Odor acceptability score (Y6) | ||||
| A | Y6a = 8.59RF + 8.62PS + 7.62AF | 65.42 | 0.003 | 0.251 |
| B | Y6b = 8.50RF + 8.34PS + 7.30BF | 77.10 | 0.001 | 0.607 |
| C | Y6c = 8.41RF + 8.33PS + 6.74QF | 84.23 | 0.000 | 0.815 |
| Texture acceptability score (Y7) | ||||
| A | Y7a = 8.09RF + 7.07PS + 4.87AF + 3.58RF × PS + 3.55RF × AF | 92.02 | 0.001 | 0.229 |
| B | Y7b = 8.63RF + 7.30PS + 6.99BF | 59.59 | 0.007 | 0.473 |
| C | Y7c = 8.37RF + 7.78PS + 7.46QF | 05.71 | 0.311 | 0.043 |
| Flavor acceptability score (Y8) | ||||
| A | Y8a = 7.87RF + 7.88PS + 5.62AF + 3.24RF + AF + 3.19PS + AF | 91.63 | 0.001 | 0.878 |
| B | Y8b = 7.89RF + 7.84PS + 6.51BF + 2.04RF × PS + 2.35RF × BF | 93.63 | 0.000 | 0.459 |
| C | Y8c = 8.30RF + 8.29PS + 6.72QF | 58.00 | 0.008 | 0.642 |
| Overall liking (Y9) | ||||
| A | Y9a = 8.14RF + 7.80PS + 5.78AF + 3.51RF × AF + 2.78 PS × AF | 90.34 | 0.001 | 0.440 |
| B | Y9b = 8.20RF + 7.67PS + 7.88BF + 2.45RF × PS − 1.99PS × BF | 84.07 | 0.003 | 0.230 |
| C | Y9c = 8.40RF + 8.27PS + 6.87QF | 61.38 | 0.005 | 0.411 |
a Mixture components: RF = rice flour, PS = potato starch, AF = amaranth flour, BF = buckwheat flour, QF = quinoa flour. b Design: amaranth (A), buckwheat (B) and quinoa (C). c Only the coefficients significant at a p < 0.05 level were selected for the predicted model construction. d R2adj adjusted coefficient of determination. e Significance of the Model and Lack of fit. p = probability level.