IE45858B1 - Reduced calorie high fibre content breads and methods of making same - Google Patents

Abstract

A bread having a calorie content per unit weight lower by about 25% is produced, which bread is very similar to conventional bread with respect to appearance, taste and structure. In order to achieve the reduction in calorie content, in the production of the dough 12-25% of the flour is replaced by cellulose, the protein decrease produced as a result being able to be compensated by addition of protein.

Description

This invention relates to reduced calorie bread having higher fibre content than is conventional and more particularly, to reduced calorie white wheat and similar types of' bread, all of which have less calories and higher fibre content than is the case with conventional breads. The invention represents an improvement or modification of that described and claimed in our Patent Specification No. 42498.

It has long been desired, and many attempts have been made in the food industry, to produce a low calorie white enriched bread which may be used in place of the white enriched bread which has become a standard in the industry and is widely accepted by young and old alike. Accordingly, sliced white bread has become so familiar to the consuming public that its volume of consumption has never been approached by any of the other breads combined, i.e. ryes, proteins, rolls, and the like. Contributing to its appear is the taste, softness, toastability, texture, and eating quality of white bread. Further, its use for making a large number of sandwiches daily has brought its use to the point that there has been no close competitior in satisfying the consuming public.

However, with this standard white enriched bread, there is a definite problem of the amount of caloric intake per bread slice and in some cases, in elderly persons, the white enriched bread has affected their digestive and elimination systems due to its consistency and texture. It has become extremely difficult for people to diet, as well as for old people to change their eating habits, because of the desire and habit of using white enriched bread. One of the past problems in substituting a low calorie bread for the standard white enriched bread has been the reluctance of the consuming public, children to adults, to reach for the low calorie bread. Some of these factors include: It did not look the same; It did not feel the same; and It did not have the same texture and taste as white enriched bread. Therefore, reduced calorie bread has never been accepted by the general public, to their health detriment.

Previous attempts to utilize various materials in low calorie, yeast leavened baked products have not provided a satisfactory solution to the problem as outlined above. It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide a reduced calorie enriched bread having a high fibre content while maintaining standard bread eating quality and texture and without reducing mineral or protein value.

Our Patent Specification No. 42498 describes and claims a reduced calorie white enriched bread product having fewer calories than the comparable standard white enriched bread product, the reduced calorie bread product including 10 parts by weight of wheat gluten, 4.8 to 6 parts by weight of brown sugar, and 22 to 24 parts by weight of an alpha-cellulose per 100 parts by weight of wheat flour.

We have now found that the ranges of alpha-cellulose and other ingredients in the bread composition can be somewhat broader than those listed in our Patent Specification No. 42498.

According to one aspect of the present invention there is provided a reduced calorie white enriched bread having fewer calories and high fibre content when compared with conventional white enriched bread equal in size and volume, the bread comprising from 12 to 25 parts by weight of an alpha-cellulose, an amount of wheat gluten effective to replace the protein lost in the composition by substituting alphacellulose for a substantial portion of the wheat flour and 4.8 to 6 parts by weight of brown sugar all based on 100 parts by weight of wheat flour.

According to another aspect of the invention there is provided a method of making a reduced calorie high fibre yeast leavened bread product having less calories and higher fibre compared with conventional bread products of the same type having a similar size and volume, comprising the steps of preparing a sponge of wheat flour, wheat gluten, yeast and yeast food, and water, and forming a dough from the sponge by adding salt, whey and soy flour, and additional ‘ wheat gluten, wheat flour, yeast and water and baking the same, said dough ingredients including 12-25 parts by weight of an alphacellulose, 4.8 to 6 parts by weight of brown sugar and an amount of wheat gluten effective to replace the protein lost in the composition by substituting alpha-cellulose for a substantial proportion of the wheat flour.

According to another aspect of the invention there is provided a composition for preparing a reduced calorie high fibre yeast raised bread product comprising: 100 parts by weight of wheat flour; parts by weight of wheat gluten; to 25 parts by weight of alpha-cellulose; and an effective amount of sweetener.

According to another aspect of the invention there is provided a method of making a reduced calorie high fibre yeast leavened bread product having fewer calories and a higher fibre content when compared with conventional bread of the same type of similar size and volume which comprises the steps of preparing a brew of water, corn sugar, salt, brew buffer and yeast, incorporating said brew into a dough by adding said brew and dough ingredients into a mixer, said dough ingredients including from 12 to 25 parts by weight of an alphacellulose, an amount of wheat gluten effective to replace the protein lost in the composition by substituting alpha-cellulose for a substantial proportion of the wheat flour, and 4.8 to 6 parts by weight of sugar, and 100 parts by weight of wheat flour.

In order to fully appreciate the invention, the following typical standared formulation for white enriched bread, for typical wheat bread and typical whole wheat bread in accordance with the prior art is tabulated below. The concentration of the ingredients is indicated in parts by weight based on 100 pounds of flour and identified in accordance with standards in practice in the industry. 4G35® STANDARD WHITE ENRICHED BREAD INGREDIENTS Parts by Weight Based on TOO lbs. Flour SPONGE Wheat Flour, Patent 65.00 Yeast 2.50 Yeast Food 0.50 Hydrated Mono- and Diglycerides 0.75 Lard 3.00 Water 37.00 Enrichment M“ (two tablets) STANDARD WHITE ENRICHED BREAD INGREDIENTS Parts by Weight Based on 100 lbs. Flour DOUGH Flour 35.00 Salt 2.25 Corn Sugar (dry) 10.00 Soy Flour and Whey 2.00 Calcium Sulfate 0.40 Calcium Propionate 0.10 Water 24.00 PROCEDURE The procedure for the standard bread is to mix the sponge ingredients in a standard mixer for approximately four minutes and allow the sponge to ferment for approximately four hours at about 76°E. The sponge is then combined with the dough ingredients and mixed for approximately ten minutes. The mixed dough is then allowed to relax for an additional 30 minutes before weighing and 10 minutes before shaping into individual loaves which are placed in bread pans and allowed to proof for approximately one hour.

The proofed loaves are baked for approximately 21 minutes at 415°F., cooled and sliced.

The foregoing ingredient composition and procedure is established for large commercial bakeries. The sponge and dough ingredients are handled in a manner which facilitates large volume production of bread for shipping and deliverying to retail outlets with a minimum of holding time for production of the sponge to purchase by the consumer.

INGREDIENTS SPONGE TYPICAL WHEAT BREAD Control A Parts by Weight Based on 100 Parts Flour Wheat Flour, Patent, Enriched Yeast Yeast Food Wheat Gluten Shortening Hydrated Mono- and Diglycerides Water 65.0 2.8 0.5 2.0 3.0 0.75 33.0 Control A TYPICAL WHEAT BREAD INGREDIENTS Parts by Weight Based on 100 Parts Flour 5 DOUGH Wheat Flour, Patent, Enriched 10.0 Whole Wheat Flour, Fine 25.0 Salt 2.25 Sugar 3.25 Refiners Syrup 7.00 10 Calcium Propionate 0.15 Water 32.00 PROCEDURE Essentially the same as the Standard White Enriched Bread as set forth above. 15 TYPICAL 100% WHOLE WHEAT BREAD Control B INGREDIENTS Parts By Weight SPONGE Whole Wheat Flour 65.0 Yeast 2.7 20 Yeast Food 0.6 Shortening 3.0 Hydrated Mono- and Di glycerides 0.6 Water 39.0 DOUGH 25 Whole Wheat Flour 35.0 Salt 2.3 Sugar 3.5 Refiners Syrup 5.0 Honey 3.0 Calcium Propionate 0.15 Water 25.0 PROCEDURE Essentially the same as the Standard White Enriched Bread as set forth above.

With the foregoing in mind and utilizing the same standards present in the art in the industry, it was necessary to discover ingredient mixes and proportions thereof, as well as procedures in keeping with standard commercial procedures producing bread having substantially reduced calories and preferably 25 to 30% less calories as compared with conventional breads of the type illustrated in the controls described above.

It Summarizing, various formulations were tried along with the results indicated, and are set forth in the examples below. From this it will be seen that the valuations in the standard formulae call for a reduction in wheat flour utilizing alpha-cellulose to replace a substantial portion of the starch contributed by the flour; the elimination of lard; and that the standard corn sugar or normal sweeteners utilized should be reduced substantially or substitute products utilized. A protein, for example a wheat protein, gluten, is added in substantially effective amounts to compensate for the loss of protein value due to reduction of flour. The selected alpha-cellulose products were incorporated in varying amounts. The total water content was materially increased, brown sugar was utilized to replace a substantial amount of the corn sugar, and varying quantities of flavouring added in order to maintain flavour quality. Preferred combinations are set forth in the following examples. Ingredients are listed as indicated in parts by weight based on 100 pounds of total flour in accordance with industry procedures.

EXAMPLE 1 SPECIAL FORMULA LIGHT BREAD SPONGE % Flour, Patent (14% Moisture Basis) 50.00 Cracked Wheat 10.00 Yeast Food 0.50 Yeast 2.0 Monocalcium Phosphate 0.125 Water (on total flour) 35.375 DOUGH Flour, Patent (14# Moisture Basis) . 40.00 Wheat Germ Flakes 2.00 Salt 2.50 Corn Sugar 8.75 Shortening 3.00 Nonfat Dry Milk 4.50 Lactalbumin 2.0 Mono- and Diglycerides PC35 0.75 Calcium Propionates 0.125 Water (on total flour) 31.625 PROCEDURE Mix sponge 4 Minutes (Speed 2) Set sponge at 78°F. for 4J hours Mix dough 8 minutes (Speed 2) (or until full development depending upon new crop wheat) Dough temp. 80°F Dough time 40 minutes Scale 18£ oz. in 8J“ x 4J pan Proof 3/4“ above pan Bake 20 minutes at 415°F. 4S8S8 STICKELBER MOULDER SETTING Head Rolls: Top 8 - Bottom 9J Compression Heights: Entrance - 2$ Exit - Zi“ Width - 7J Three doughs of regular special formula bread were made using a standard formula in which the yeast was increased to 2.5% from 2%. In two of the doughs, 12% vital wheat gluten (from Viking (trade mark)) and 7.5% Avicel (trade mark) RC501 cellulose were added. The dough absorption was increased to a total of 108% (including water in sponge). One dough was mixed 9 minutes and the other 11 minutes. Both doughs were given 20 minutes floor time before scaling. Loaves were scaled to 18 and 18J ounces. The doughs were so slack and sticky poing to the moulder that some loaves were lost. The 11 minute mix appeared slightly drier than the 9 minute mix. In the third dough, 12% vital wheat gluten plus 9.5% Avicel RC501 were added with the same total absorption. The third dough appeared tighter out of the mixer, but was still slack and wet to the moulder. All of these doughs made good volume bread but the flavour and eating quality of the product was considered very poor and not desirable.

In a follow up text, six doughs of special formula light bread were made. Three of the doughs were made with ADM (control flour) with the protein approximately 11.3% and three doughs were made with Hecker's Special Flour with the protein approximately 13.5%. The variables made with each of the flour were as follows: n (1) 5% gluten - 10% Avicel RC501 cellulose added to the dough (2) 5% gluten - 12% Avicel RC501 cellulose added to the dough (3) 7% gluten - 12% Avicel RC501 cellulose added to the dough The yeast in the standard formula is increased from 2% to 2.5%.

The total absorption used was 100, 100 and 104%. All the doughs were good. The breads made with Hecker's Special Flour had the greatest loaf volume. The best bread was the one made with 7% gluten and 12% cellulose (number 3 above). The flavour of the breads was slightly improved over the previous examples referred to above.

Following the above tests, three additional doughs were mixed using the following revised special formula light bread to reduced calories. The sponge utilized was the regular formula except that the yeast was increased from 2 to 2.5%. The dough was made up as follows: DOUGH % Flour 40.00 Salt 2.65 Corn Sugar 12.00 Nonfat Dry Milk 4.5 Lactalbumin 2.0 PC35 0.75 Wheat Gluten (Viking) 7.00 Wheat Germ Flakes 2.00 Calcium Propionate 0.125 Yeast (see below) Cellulose (see below) Water (see below) 858 Variable Number (1) (2) (3) % alpha-cellulose (International Filler Corp.), 1% yeast, 120% absorption, % Avicel RC501, 1% yeast, 108% absorption. % alpha-cellulose (International Filler Corp.), 1.5% yeast, 131% absorption.

The results of the test show that the best bread was the third formula, that including the 20% alpha-cellulose, 1.5% yeast having 131% absorption. The doughs from (1) and (2) were too slack and collapsed. It appeared, as a result, of this test, that Avicel does not absorb the water that alpha-cellulose does. The third variable formula above utilizing 20% alpha-cellulose produced from the following table illustrating a reduction of calories compared to a standard formula of approximately 25% less calories calculated by the Atwater method using the values taken from USDA Agriculture Handbook No. 8. (Revised December 1963). 43858 CALORIE REDUCTION Calculated calories based on formula with 20% alpha-cellulose (Variable No (3) Weight Calories Solids Flour 90 329.0) ) 86.0 Cracked Wheat 10 33.0) Yeast Food 0.5 0.7 0.5 Yeast 4.0 . 3.52 1.2 Calcium Acid Phosphate 0.125 - 0.125 Wheat Germ Flakes 2.0 7.8 2.0 Salt 2.65 - 2.55 Corn Sugar 12.0 43.92 9.0 less fermentation Nonfat Dry Milk 4.5 16.3 4.3 Lactalbumin 2.0 7.3 2.0 Calcium Propionate 0.125 - 0.125 PC35 0.75 2.3 0.26 Wheat Gluten 7.0 26.48 6.3 Alpha-cellulose 20.0 - 20.0 Water 131.0 - - 286.65 470.32 x .87 yield 249.3855 134.465 46% moisture 54% solids Variation No. (3) Regular Formula 1.89 cal/g -- 71.59% or 28.41% 2.64 cal/g reduction in calories.

SUMMARY The Avicel or crystalline cellulose products described in the prior art did not produce satisfactory doughs or breads, whereas the Variation No. (3) in the formula set forth above, i.e. 20% alpha-cellulose with the change in the amount of yeast, produced a satisfactory product which exceeded in the preferred goal of a 25% calorie reduction using the Atwater method of calcaulation.

EXAMPLE II REDUCED CALORIE DIET BREAD Six doughs of a diet bread were made for the purpose of developing a loaf of diet bread. Three of the doughs were made from the following formula with a proprietary diet mix: SPONGE 1 Flour 70.00 Yeast 2.50 Yeast Food 0.50 Enrichment M (4 tablets per 100 pounds flour) The sponge temperature was 78°F. and was allowed to ferment for 3J hours.

DOUGH % Hour 30.00 Brown Sugar 6.00 Soy Hour 3.00 Emplex 0.50 Diet Mix (1) 45.00 Yeast 1.00 Calcium Propionate 0.50 Salt 3.00 Water 105.00 Calcium Sulfate 1.24 Flour Yeast Yeast Food Enrichment “M Wheat Gluten Water The sponge temperature was DOUGH Flour Brown Sugar Soy Flour Emplex Wheat Gluten Cellulose HW-200 Yeast Calcium Propionate Salt Calcium Sulfate Water (I) Watson Flour Company, Long Island City, NY.

The mixture was mixed for 10 minutes with a 20 minute dough time and scaled 18J ounces in 8J x 4J top dimension pans.

Three doughs were made from the following formula which did not utilize the diet mix: SPONGE % 70.00 2.50 0.50 (4 tablets per 100 pounds flour) .00 49.00 78°F. and it was fermented for 3J hours. % .00 6.00 .00 0.50 10.00 15.00 1.00 0.50 3.00 1.24 92.00 Of the three doughs made from the formula utilizing the diet mix, the number 1 dough had 45% diet mix, the number 2 dough had 45% diet mix plus 4% cellulose plus 8% water. Number 3 dough had 45% diet mix plus 6% cellulose plus 12% water. Of the three doughs made from ; the formula utilizing cellulose HW-200 and no diet mix - number 4 dough was the control which is the same as the basic formula set forth above; number 5 dough has the same formula but with absorption increased 2%; number 6 dough had the best absorption of number 4 and 5 in which case absorption of number 5 was chosen plus 4% additional cellulose plus 8% more absorption.

The results of the test indicated that the flavour and eating quality of the bread from doughs 1, 2 and 3 was bland. The bread was chewy and rubbery. Dough 1 had the highest volume and better grain.

The flavour and eating quality of the breads from 4, 5 and 6 was strong gluten and more rubbery than the products made from doughs 1, 2 and 3.

EXAMPLE III DIET BREAD Ten doughs were made utilizing the following formulations:SPONGE Flour 70.00 Yeast Yeast Food Wheat Gluten Water Enrichment 2.50 0.67 2.00 41.00 (0.43 grams) The sponge was mixed for four minutes and set at 78°F. for 3J hours.

DOUGH % Flour 30.00 Salt 3.00 Brown Sugar 6.00 Extram C 3.00 Wheat Gluten 8.00 Calcium Propionate 0.50 Yeast 2.00 Alpha-cellulose 15.00 Water 88.00 Emplex 0.50 Potassium Bromate (60 ppm.) Different samples of alpha-cellulose were used as follows:Dough No. 1 - Cellulose HW - 200 Dough No. 2 - Cellulose BH - 200 Dough No. 3 - C - 200 Dough No. 4 - Solkafloc SW - 100 (trade mark) Dough No. 5 - Solkafloc BW - 40 (trade mark) The last five doughs were duplicate doughs for absorption and mixing time corrections. The breads were baked for 25 minutes at 430°F. All doughs were mixed for 15 minutes. The total absorption used were: No. 1 - 86%; No. 2 - 75%; No. 3 - 78%; No. 4 - 75%; No. 5 - 78%.

The comments with respect to the dough feel were as follows.

Dough No. 6 feels better but it still has a wet feeling. No. 7 is slack but a better development and less Wet feeling. No. 8 is similar to No. 6 but is tighter and less wet.

A further variation of the diet bread of this example resulted from making eight doughs from the following formula with the variations as indicated below. 4S8S8 SPONGE % Flour 70.00 Yeast 2.5 Yeast Food 0.67 Wheat Gluten 2.00 Water 41.00 Enrichment (0.43 grams) DOUGH Flour 30.00 Brown Sugar No. 10 6.00 Salt 2.75 Extram C 3.00 Wheat Gluten 8.00 Calcium Propionate 0.50 Calcium Sulfate 1.25 Emplex 0.50 Yeast 1.50 Potassium Bromate (20 ppm.) Water 74.5 Alpha-cellulose 15.00 The sponges were mixed for four minutes at speed No. 2 and set at 78° F. for 3) hours. The doughs we're mixed for 15 minutes at speed No. 2 at 81°F. and allowed to set for a dough time of 20 minutes. The doughs were scaled 18-3/4 ounces in a 8) x 4i pan, proofed 3/4 above the pan. The doughs were all baked for 25 minutes at 440°F. 4Q858 The variations used were: Doughs Nos. 1 and 2 - 15% cellulose BH - 200 Doughs Nos. 3 and 4-15% cellulose BW - 100 Doughs Nos. 5 and 6 - 20% cellulose BH - 200 Doughs Nos. 7 and 8 - 20% cellulose BW - 100 Sesame seeds were sprinkled on top of some of the loaves before baking.

RESULTS Comments of the examination of the diet breads made in accordance 10 with the above examples, are as follows: % BH - 200 - excellent loaf volume and height, slightly open grain and slightly wet crum.

% BW - 100 - slightly less volume but acceptable and a slightly wetter crumb than BH - 200 and a silkier texture.

% BH - 200 - more open grain and a wetter crumb.

% BW - 100 - slightly dried crumb than BH - 200, equal volume, silkier and smoother texture.

DIET BREAD DATA McO O iO Jcn 43858 q·· o S Cl ω •σ φ Φ σ» o u φ φ φ α. α. ω -σ ω α. φ r— Φ συ (Ζ) υ Φ > σ) •σ σ C <0 σ φ φ 3 >) o φ φ φ Ο φ σ) σι <3* ΙΖ) ι-» g co g g ro J- Φ ΙΟ Ο 1 Φ (0 (Ζ) σι CL ΙΛ Φ Φ ί- eo Φ ΙΛ σ> ο « Ό (Λ Lft Φ σι ω co σ> ε ε ε Μ 3 ε <0 φ ε II m S- k (0 <Λ &. cn cn ί. cn σ cn cn c φ Lfi tn in ο Φ σι r-· P“ Ο φ σι ε It II II Φ σ» υ Φ ο ir> o C σ> OJ OJ 3 ο (Ζ) I 1 1 ε <0 ο O o i_ ο O o ro Cn OJ · V I co OJ co 3E Ch co eo CO The weight per slice increases with the seeds approximately 0.5 to 1.3 or an average of 0.9 grams per slice.

SLICING % BH-200-slices fairly smooth.

% BW-100-slices slightly rough.

% BH-200-slices slightly rough-wet.

% BW-100-slices rough-wet.

EXAMPLE IV DIET WHEAT BREAD Eleven different doughs were made using the following formulation with the variations indicated below: SPONGE Flour Wheat Gluten Yeast Yeast Food Water (on total flour) DOUGH 70.00 2.00 2.50 0.67 41.00 Flour Flour, Whole Wheat, Fine Salt Wheat Gluten Extram C Calcium Sulfate Emplex Calcium Propionate Brown Sugar No. 10 Yeast Alpha-cellulose BH-20 Water (on total flour) Potassium Bromate .00 .00 3.00 8.00 3.00 1.25 0.50 0.50 .00 1.50 20.00 69.00 (30 ppm.) Variable Number 1. 20% cellulose formula - control 2. Control formula plus 0.25% Cardamom. 3. Control formula plus 0.25% Cardamom and 0.0625% orange flavour. 4. Control formula plus 0.15% Lime flavour 30-S.

. Control formula plus 0.015% Lime flavour 301-S. 6. 22% cellulose - 0.25% Cardamom plus 60 ppm bromate plus 1% absorption. 7. 25% cellulose - 0.25% Cardamom plus 2.5% absorption,60ppm of bromate. 8. 25% cellulose - 1% gluten increase in dough, 0.25% Cardamom absorption increased 3.5%, bromate 60 ppm. 9. 5% gluten in the sponge and 3% increase in sponge absorption, 3% gluten and 3% absorption from dough, 20% cellulose plus 0.50% Brown Sugar Flavour.

. Same as No. 9 but with 10% cellulose added to sponge, sponge absorption increased 11% - 3% gluten, 11% water and 10% cellulose subtracted from the dough plus 3 grams of brown sugar flavour added to dough. 11. Same as No. 10 but with 10% cellulose in the sponge, 12% cellulose in the dough, 0.75 grams butternut maple flavour added to the dough.

RESULTS Comments on examination of these breads resulted in the following tabulations: No. 1, chewy-bland.

No. 2, slight spice aftertaste, more flavour than No. 1.

No. 3, too strong, unpleasant, slightly bitter - 2 and 3 lower volume than 1, 4 or 5.

No. 4, slightly more flavour than No. 1.

No. 5, better flavour than No. 4.

No. 6, slight spice-low level flavour No. 7, same as No. 6.

No. 8, 25% cellulose, more tender eating quality, slightly more bitter. No. 9, brown sugar aroma, very strong brown sugar flavour - too strong. No. 10, milder brown sugar flavour.

No. 11, sweet aroma, pleasant.

EXAMPLE V DIET WHEAT BREAD Three additional diet wheat bread doughs were made from a formula illustrated in the previous examples for the control, with the following modifications: SPONGE Flour % 70.00 Wheat Gluten 2.00 Yeast 2.50 Yeast Food 0.67 Water (on total flour) 41.00 Enrichment (0.43 DOUGH « Flour 10.00 Whole Wheat Flour (fine) 20.00 Salt 3.25 Wheat Gluten 9.00 Extram C 3.00 Emplex 0.50 Brown Sugar No. 10 6.00 Yeast 1.50 Calcium Propionate 0.50 Calcium Sulfate (Snow white) 2.50 Alpha-cellulose BH-200 25.00 Water (on total flour) 73.00 Bromate (60 ppm.) Cardamom (ground) 0.33 Three doughs were made in accordance with the control formula involving 20% cellulose with 0.33% (2 grams) cardamom. In a mixing time series, dough No. 1 had a 12 minute mix, dough No. 2 had a 14 minute mix, dough No. 3 had a 16 minute mix. Six doughs were made from the formula set forth above with 25% cellulose and no bromate in the doughs as follows.

The first series was an absorption series. No. 1 dough had a 114.J0% absorption. No. 2 had a 116.50% absorption. No. 3 had a 118.50% absorption. In the second series, the 116.50% absorption was used and the mixing time was varied 12, 14 and 16 minutes.

The results of these showed that the 25% cellulose formulation was better with higher absorption. The best absorption achieved was 116.50%.

An additional nine doughs were made using the formula set forth above having 25% by weight alpha-cellulose BH-200 with the following variations. 458 58 Dough No. 1 - 1% more yeast added to the dough side and no bromate.

Dough No. 2 - same as No. 1 with 60 ppm bromate (13.2 ml) added.

Dough No. 3 - same as No. 1 with 90 ppm bromate (19.8 ml) added.

Dough No. 4 - 0.25% calcium acid phosphate added to the sponge, no bromate. Dough No. 5 - same as No. 4 with 1% more yeast added to the dough.

Dough No. 6 - same as No. 5 with 60 ppm bromate (13.2 ml) added.

Dough No. 7 - same as No. 5 with 90 ppm bromate (19.8 ml) added.

Dough No. 8 - same as No. 4 with 60 ppm bromate (13.2 ml) added.

Dough No. 9 - same as No. 4 with 90 ppm bromate (19.8 ml) added.

All these breads were proofed to one inch above the top of the pan and baked for 22 minutes at 440 F.

EXAMPLE VI REDUCED CALORIE WHITE BREAD Three doughs were made from the following formula with the 15 variations indicated below: SPONGE ' % Flour (14% moisture basis) 70.00 Wheat Gluten 2.00 Yeast 2.50 Yeast Food 0.67 Emplex 6.50 Water (on total flour) 41.00 Enrichment M (3 tablets) DOUGH % Flour 30.00 Salt 3.00 Wheat Gluten 8.70 Extram C 3.00 Calcium Sulfate (Snow white) 1.25 Brown Sugar (No. 10) 6.00 Calcium Propionate 0.50 Yeast 1.50 Cellulose (BH-200) 21.0C Water (on total flour) 69.00 Bromate (30 ppm) PROCEDURE The sponge is mixed for four minutes and set at 76°F. for 31 hours. The dough is mixed for 14 minutes with a dough temperature of 80°F. and a dough set time of 20 minutes. The dough is scaled 18-3/4 ounces with 8Jx 41 pans. Intermediate proof at 10 minutes. Proofed to 3/4 above the pant. The proof box temperature was 110°F. dry; 106°F. wet. Bake for 20 minutes at 450°F., slice 3/8 thick, 22 slices.

The three variations to this formula were: Dough No. 1-0.3 grams of one brown sugar flavour added.

Dough No. 2-0.3 grams of a different brown sugar flavour added. Dough No. 3-01 gram orange flavour added.

RESULTS All three variations made satisfactory bread.

No. 1 had a pleasant flavour No. 2 had a slight aftertaste.

No. 3 had a slight citrus flavour not as acceptable as No. 1. 43858 EXAMPLE VII REDUCED CALORIE BREAD For a series of feeding studies (see belov? at page 43) to be made comparing reduced calorie bread with enriched standard formula bread, a large number of loaves of bread was baked under substantially the same conditions in our laboratory.

The formulation utilized for the reduced calorie bread was that described in the previous example, (Example VI), the first variation, with the following changes: The cellulose was increased to 22? instead of the 21? given in the previous example. The gluten was reduced to 10? instead of 10.7?. No bromate was used and the absorption was 112.7? instead of 110?. Both the control standard enriched bread and the reduced calorie bread utilized the same enrichment tablets.

EXAMPLE VIII REDUCED CALORIE BREAD The dough No. 1 formulation for the example set forth in Example VI was modified in the following variables: DOUGH NO. 1. A control precisely as set forth. 2. The brown sugar flavour was omitted. 3. No brown sugar flavour was utilized and 0.4? Flavour Compound 51.032/cp. 4. No brown sugar flavour - 0.4? Flavour Compound 126-37-02/cp 0.5.51.

. No brown sugar flavour - 0.4? Flavour Compound 126-37-03/cp 0.5.51. 6. No brown sugar flavour - 0.4? Flavour Compound 126-37-04/cp 0.5.51. 7. The control formula was used substituting cellulose ES-85A. 8. The control formula was used substituting cellulose ES-85B. 9. The control formula was used substituting cellulose ES-85C.

. The control formula was used substituting cellulose ES-85D. 11. The control formula was used substituting cellulose ES-85£.

The control formula was used substituting cellulose ES-85F.

The cellulose additives utilized in doughs Nos. 7 through 12 are ITT Rayonier samples of ground cellulose having the following description: ES-85A is BH-200 control .22% ether extractables; ES-85B is BH-200 low EE .11% ether extractaoles; ES-85C is BH-200 HgOg treated .18% ether extractables; ES-85D is BH-200 high EE .40% ether estractables; ES-85E is BH-200 plus Port Angeles Fines .81%; ES-85F - Port Angeles Fines 5.0% ether extractables.

The bread baked utilizing ES-85F was of a very dark, cocoa-type 10 colour and was the only one of the 7 through 12 samples baked which did not bake well.

EXAMPLE IX REDUCED CALORIE WHITE ENRICHED BREAD INGREDIENTS Parts by Weight Based On 100 lbs. Total Flour SPONGE Wheat Flour 70.00 Wheat Gluten 2.00 Yeast 2.00 Yeast Food 0.50 20 Emplex (1) 0.50 Water 41.00 Enrichment M (2) (three tablets) INGREDIENTS Parts by Weight Based on 100 lbs. Total Flour DOUGH Wheat Flour 30.00 Salt 3.00 Brown Sugar (6) 6.00 Soy Flour and Whey (3) 3.00 Wheat Gluten 8.00 Calcium Sulfate 1.25 Calcium Propionate 0.50 Selected Cellulose (4) 22.00 Yeast 1.50 Water 74.22 Flavour (5) .09 FOOTNOTES (1) A dough conditioning additive produced by C.J. Paterson, Co., Kansas City, Missouri (2) A vitamin and mineral enrichment, identified as No. 335, by Paniplus, Kansas City, Missouri (3) Marketed as Extram C by Paniplus, Kansas City, Missouri 20 (4) Selected Cellulose: (a) Cellulose BH200, the International Filler Corporation, No. Tonawanda, New York, having the following characteristics: . Grade Φ BH200 Raw Material Bleached Sulphite Woodpulp (Hardwood) Chemical Properties: Alpha Content - 89.0% % KOH Sol. - 17.0 Ether Extract - 0.24% G.E. Brightness - 94.0% 43858 Physical Properties: Moisture -5-7% Bulk Density -135 ML/50 Gram Typical Screen Analysis % on % thru 100 Mesh - 2.5 ,200 Mesh - 10.0 86,0 (b) Also found acceptable in the Example and with similar characteristics was Cellulose BW-200 produced by Brown Company/Berlin-Gorham Division, Berlin, N.H. (5) Firmenich (trade mark) Flavour, Type F-5109/TP, Firmenich, Inc., New York, N.Y. (6) Golden Brown No. 10, Amstar Corporation, New York, N.Y.

PROCEDURE The reduced calorie white enriched bread was prepared according to the following procedure: Mix sponge four (4) minutes (high speed) in Day Horizontal Mixer, Set sponge at 76°F.

Ferment for 3J hours.

Mix dough 12 minutes (high speed) in Day Horizontal Mixer.

(To full development, dry and extensible dough).

Hold out the salt until pick-up. (5 minutes) Dough temp. 80°F. after mixing.

Dough fermentation time 20 minutes Scaling weight 18 - 3/4 ounces Intermediate proof 10 minutes Shape and place in pan 8J x 4J x 3J inches Proof to 3/4 above pan.

Bake 18 minutes at 450°F.

Cool and slice. 4ΰβ58 RESULTS The approximately 220 loaves which were produced from the example were analyzed and evaluated to confirm that the low calorie bread was similar in all respects to the standard white enriched bread including quality, specific volume, colour, grain and texture, crumb and taste. The differences, if any, from the standard white enriched bread were to all intent and purposes undetectable by the evaluators.

EXAMPLE X The procedure for Example IX was repeated with the selected cellulose content varying from 15 to 21 parts by weight of total flour. Adjustments were made in the water content to obtain the normal dough by procedures familiar to those skilled in the art.

The resultant loaves were evaluated and it was determined that they did not meet the requirements of at least 25% reduction in caloric content.

EXAMPLE XI The procedure for Example IX was repeated with the selected cellulose content increasing from 22 up to 25 parts by weight of total flour with appropriate adjustments in the water content. The water content adjustments were made by procedures familiar to those skilled in the arts to obtain the normal dough. The results obtained with the increased amount up to 25% were also acceptable and met the minimum requirements of 25% reduction of calories from the standard formula, and the bread had a satisfactory colour, grain, texture and eating quality.

EXAMPLE XII The procedure for Example IX was varied with the selected cellulose content increasing from 26 to 30 parts by weight of total flour with appropriate adjustments in water content to compensate for the increase in cellulose and to obtain the normal dough. The results were unsatisfactory and there was an adverse effect on the grain and texture of the bread and it did not produce a loaf satisfactory in eating quality. With an increasing content of cellulose, the resultant product had less appeal than the standard white enriched bread due to many factors including poor slicing ability, a gummy texture and poor grain.

EXAMPLE XIII The procedure for Example IX was repeated with the brown sugar reduced 20% and the flavouring was varied 20%.

The results were also found to be acceptable and met the minimum requirements. 58 5 8 EXAMPLE XIV REDUCED CALORIE WHEAT BREAD - SPONGE METHOD A reduced calorie wheat bread was made from the following formula:INGREDIENTS PARTS BY WEIGHT SPONGE Wheat Flour, Enriched . 55.0 Whole Wheat Flour, Fine 5.0 Wheat Bran 10.0 Wheat Gluten 3.0 10 Yeast 2.5 Yeast Food 0.5 Sodium Stearoyl-2 Lactylate 0.5 Ethoxylated Monoglycerides 0.12 Mono- and Diglycerides 0.18 15 Water 46.0 DOUGH Wheat Flour, Enriched 30.0 Salt 3.0 Brown Sugar 6.0 20 Granulated Sugar 3.0 Soy Flour and Whey 3.0 DOUGH Wheat Gluten 7.0 Calcium Sulfate 1.25 Calcium Propionate 0.5 Selected Powdered Cellulose 22.0 Yeast 1.0 Flavour .09 Water 79.0 The ethoxylated monoglycerides, sodium stearoyl-2 lactylate and the 10 mono- and diglycerides set forth in the above formula are optional dough conditioners. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that Polysorbate 60 and succinylated monoglycerides may also be considered as alternate dough strengtheners that can be used in place of or in conjunction with sodium stearoyl-2 lactylate and ethoxylated monoglycerides.

PROCEDURE The sponge was mixed for 3 minutes and set at 76°F for 4 hours.

The dough was mixed 10 minutes and salt was added after 5 minutes. The dough was fermented at 80°F. for 20 minutes dough time. The dough was scaled 18-3/4 ounces in 8J x 41 pans, proofed and baked for 23 minutes at 430°F.

EXAMPLE XV REDUCED CALORIE WHEAT BREAD - BREW METHOD A reduced calorie wheat bread using the brew and dough procedure was made in accordance with the following: BREW AND DOUGH PROCEDURE INGREDIENTS_Parts by Weight BREW Water Sugar 47.00 4.7 1.1 .3 3.9 10 Salt Buffer Salt Yeast DOUGH Wheat Flour, Enriched 85.0 15 Whole Wheat Flour 5.0 Wheat Bran 10.0 Wheat Gluten 10.0 Selected Cellulose 22.0 Brown Sugar 5.0 20 Granulated Sugar 3.0 Soy Flour and Whey 3.0 Salt 1.9 Calcium Sulfate 1.25 Calcium Propionate 0.50 2.5 Yeast Food (Brewloid) 0.75 Flavour .09 Sodium Stearoyl-2 Lactylate 0.5 Ethoxylated Monoglycerides 0.12 Mono- and Diglycerides 0.18 30 Water 78.0 PROCEDURE The brew is set at a temperature of 80°F. and allowed to rise to a temperature of 88°F. during a fermentation time of about 2 hours. It is then cooled to 45°F.

The cooled brew and all dough ingredients are added to the mixer and mixed in low speed for 5 minutes. The mixer is shifted into high speed and the dough is mixed for about 12 minutes more. Dough temperature should be 78°F. 'to 82°F.

The dough is allowed to rest for 20 to 40 minutes before dividing and moulding.

RESULTS Satisfactory bread was made in a commercial bakery.

EXAMPLE XVI WHITE REDUCED CALORIE BREAD BY THE BREW METHOD A reduced calorie enriched white bread using the brew-dough method was made as follows: BREW % Water 82.42 Corn Sugar 8.25 Salt 1.92 Brew Buffer 0.54 Yeast 6.875 DOUGH % Brew 30.7 Water 97.0 Flour 100.0 Cellulose BH-200 22.0 Wheat Gluten 10.0 Sodium Stearoyl-2 Lactylate 0.50 Brown Sugar No. 10 5.0 Extram C“ 3.0 Salt 2.40 Calcium Sulfate 1.25 Calcium Propionate 0.50 Brewloid 0.50 Pan Aid 0.25 Flavour 0.09 Enrichment R-469 (one tablet) RESULTS Satisfactory bread was made in a commercial bakery.

EXAMPLE XVII HIGH FIBRE BREAD The following example of a high fibre bread having considerably less reduction in total caloric content was made: SPONGE % Flour, Enriched 50.0 25 Whole Wheat Flour (fine) 15.00 Wheat Bran 5.00 Wheat Gluten 3.00 Yeast 2.50 Yeast Food 0.50 30 Sodium Stearoyl-2 Lactylate 0.50 Water (on total flour) 46.00 Enrichment (R-469) (one tablet) DOUGH Flour, Enriched 30.00 Salt 3.00 Soybean Oil 2.00 Brown Sugar No. 10 6.00 Raisin Juice Concentrate 6.00 Soy Flour 2.50 Wheat Gluten 2.00 Cellulose BH-200 12.00 Sesame Seeds 3.00 Yeast 1.50 Butter Flavour .025 Water (on total flour) 50.00 PROCEDURE The sponge was mixed for 3 minutes and set at 76°F. for 4 hours. The dough was mixed for 8 minutes, salt was added after 5 minutes.

The dough was proofed at 80°F. for 20 minutes dough time.

RESULTS This formula made very good bread in a commercial bakery.

EXAMPLE XVIII REDUCED CALORIE WHITE BAKERY FORMULA SPONGE 4 Minutes, 76°F., 4 hours % Flour, Enriched 70.00 Wheat Gluten 2.00 Yeast 2.00 Yeast Food 0.50 Sodium Stearoyl-2 Lactylate 0.50 Water (on total flour) 44.00 Enrichment (R-469) (one tablet) DOUGH, 80°F., salt in 7 minutes, ? total 12 minutes, minutes floortime Flour, Enriched 30.00 Salt 3.00 Brown Sugar No. 10 6.00 Granulated Sugar 3.00 Wheat Gluten 8.00 Calcium Sulphate 1.25 Calcium Propionate 0.50 Cellulose BH-200 23.00 Water (on total flour) 80.00 Firmenich Flavour 0.091 Elasdo 0.3 Lactalbumin 1.6 RESULTS This formula gave excellent bread.

The foregoing examples and evaluations indicate that reduced calorie, high fibre content bread products can be produced having the equivalent taste, texture and appeal to those of standard breads if the cellulose is critically controlled in relation to the total flour content and if the other adjustments indicated as effective are made to provide for an equivalent tasting end product.

In order to substantiate our evaluation, and to demonstrate meaningful results and benefits gained by utilizing the low calorie white enriched bread, a clinical test was conducted with 16 college students. The students were divided into two groups, eight individuals in each group, all on a similar diet with the exception that one group ate 12 slices per day of standard white enriched bread, and the other group ate 12 slices per day of reduced calorie white enriched hread.

The test was conducted for an eight week period with 13 students completing the test. Seven students completed the test in the standard white enriched bread group, and 6 students completed the test in the reduced calorie white enriched bread group. Each student in each group consumed the 12 slices per day in addition to the other food provided. Documentation was made for the weight reduction while the usual nutritional guide lines were adhered to. The composite person for the group eating the 12 slices per day of the standard formula white enriched bread lost 13.6 pounds or 1.7 pounds per week or approximately 32% of their excess weight. The composite person for the group consuming 12 slices per day of the reduced calorie white enriched bread lost 19,3 pounds or 2.4 pounds per week or a loss of 41% of the excess weight, this additional loss of weight being solely attributed to the difference in consumption of the reduced calorie bread in place of the white bread. In addition, it was indicated by those consuming the reduced calorie bread that it was in most, if not substantially all, factors the same and as acceptable to them as consuming the stanard white enriched bread to which they were generally accustomed.

It is anticipated for the future, in evaluating the reduced calorie formula bread, that substantial benefits may be obtained by elderly persons who consume the reduced calorie bread, the benefits deriving mainly from the increased consumption of a cellulose which will provide the necessary roughage to contribute to the proper functioning of their 8 5® digestive and elimination systems.. This contribution will not be at the expense of reducing the nutritional value obtainable from the reduced calorie bread, qor will it sacrifice the taste, texture and eating quality to which the most elderly people have long been accustomed in consuming the standard white enriched bread formulation. These evaluations in connection with this new reduced calorie formulation white enriched bread indicate that a significantly improved formulation has been achieved which substantially advances the value to the consumer without reducing the standard white enriched bread nutrition, appeal and edibility.

It should also be understood by those skilled in the art that while the specific baking examples referred to above are given according to the standard sponge and brew dough procedure utilized in the baking industry, with only slight modifications therefrom the baking results obtained are valid not only for this sponge dough method but also for the continuous mix, Short time, no time, and straight dough methods.

Our Patent Specification No. 42498 describes a reduced calories white enriched bread product and a method for making the same.

Accordingly we make no claim to a reduced calories white enriched bread product having fewer calories than the comparable standard white enriched bread product, the reduced calorie bread product including 10 parts by weight of wheat gluten, 4.8 to 6 parts by weight of brown sugar, and 22 to 25 parts by weight of an alpha-cellulose per 100 parts by weight of wheat flour; nor to a method of producing a reduced calories white bread product comprising the steps of: preparing a sponge of wheat flour, wheat gluten, yeast and yeast food, and water; and forming a dough from the sponge by adding wheat flour, salt, whey and soy flour, wheat gluten, yeast, water, and adding 22 to 25 parts by weight of an alpha-cellulose and 4.8 to 6 parts by weight of brown sugar per 100 parts by weight of wheat flour, the total weight gluten content comprising 10 parts by weight per 100 parts by weight of wheat flour.

Claims (8)

1. A reduced calorie white enriched bread having fewer calories and higher fibre content when compared with conventional white enriched bread equal in size and volume, the bread comprising from 12 to 25 parts by weight of an alpha-cellulose, an amount of wheat gluten effective to replace the protein lost in the composition by substituting alpha-cellulose for a substantial portion of the wheat flour and 4.8 to 6.0 parts by weight of brown sugar all based on 100 parts by weight of wheat flour.

2. A composition for preparing a reduced calorie high fibre yeast raised bread product comprising: 100 parts by weight of wheat flour; 10 parts by weight of wheat gluten; and an effective amount of sweetener.

3. A composition as claimed in claim 2, including an effective amount by weight of a flavouring ingredient.

4. A reduced calorie bread product substantially as described herein with reference to the Examples.

5. A composition for preparing a reduced calorie white bread product substantially as described herein with reference to the Examples.

6. A method of making a reduced calorie high fibre yeast leavened bread product having less calories and higher fibres compared with conventional bread products of the same type having a similar size and volume, comprising the steps of preparing a sponge of wheat flour, wheat gluten, yeast and yeast food, and water, and forming a dough from the sponge by adding salt, whey and soy flour, and additional wheat gluten, wheat flour, yeast and water and baking the same, said dough ingredients including 100 parts by weight of wheat flour, 12-15 parts by weight of an alpha-cellulose, 4.8 to 6 parts by weight of brown sugar, and an amount of wheat gluten effective to replace the protein lost in the composition by substituting alpha-cellulose for a substantial proportion of the wheat flour.

7. A method of making a reduced calorie high fibre yeast leavened \ bread product having fewer calories and a higher fibre content when compared with conventional bread of the same type of similar size and volume which comprises the steps of preparing a brew of water, corn 10 sugar, salt brew buffer and yeast, incorporating said brew into a dough by adding said brew and dough ingredients into a mixer, said dough ingredients including from 12 to 25 parts by weight of an alphacellulose, an amount of wheat gluten effective to replace the protein lost in the composition by substituting alpha-cellulose for a 15 substantial proportion of the wheat flour, and 4.8 to 6 parts by weight of sugar, and 100 parts by weight of wheat flour.

8. A method of producing a reduced calorie white bread product substantially as described herein with reference to the Examples.