KR20180056611A - Premixed of Oat with high beta-glucan for fried dish and Manufacturing Method Thereof - Google Patents

Abstract

The present invention relates to an oat pancake mix having high beta-glucan contents and a preparing method thereof. More specifically, as a result of investigating particle sizes of oats having high beta-glucan contents for development of an oat pancake mix, the highest beta-glucan contents are shown in naked oats 100 mesh and covered oats 60 mesh, and a low glycemic index (gi) is shown when flour is mixed with the naked oats, and rice powder is mixed with the covered oats. Further, as a result of preparing pancakes by using a pancake mix in which the oats having high beta-glucan contents are mixed with grain powder in various mixing ratios, investigating components, properties and the like as well as beta-glucan contents, gelatination characteristics, glycemic index, palatability and the like thereof, an oat pancake mix prepared by mixing 40% of oats having high beta-glucan contents is confirmed to have the highest palatability and functionality. Therefore, the oat pancake mix and the preparing method thereof may be beneficially used as a material for health food products.

Description

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention [0001] The present invention relates to an oat drop mix having a high beta-glucan content and a method for producing the same,

The present invention relates to an oatmeal mix having a high beta-glucan content and a process for producing the same.

With the increase in life expectancy due to the development of medical technology, there has been a growing interest in improving the quality of life in recent years, and this phenomenon is becoming more prominent in the fields of foods and health foods.

Oats (Avena sativa L.) is one of the top 10 super foods in the world and one of the most popular crops for consumers. In recent years, as interest in oats has increased, it is urgent to develop processing materials that can be consumed variously instead of simply mixing healthy oats.

Origin of oats is the Central Asian region, which is an edible plant containing starch, peeled, flattened and made with oatmeal, cookies, and the like. When the husks are peeled off during the threshing process, rice oats are separated into oats if they are not peeled off. Rice oats are used mainly for edible purposes because they can be omitted from peeling, and oats are mainly used for the production of forage. Cold tolerance and tillering capacity are strong in the outermost layer, and the plant height is high in rice oats, and the outermost layer is highly cultivated.

According to the Food and Drug Administration, oat fiber intake of 0.8g or more a day can help to prevent postprandial hyperglycemia, and it can be helpful to improve blood cholesterol when ingested more than 3g.

It is also known that oats contain beta-glucans ((1-3), (1-4) -? - D-glucan) which have immunomodulating action. Beta Glucan is a useful physiologically active substance that lowers blood cholesterol and LDL-cholesterol concentration, increases HDL-cholesterol concentration, inhibits cholesterol liver accumulation and lowers lipid digestion function. Beta Glucan is a dietary fiber that is not digested or absorbed in the body and is produced in various forms from yeast, mushroom, and grains. Generally, beta-glucan differs in structure and characteristics depending on the raw material. The beta-glucan of cereal is mainly present in the cell wall, and its structure is a straight-chain type in which β-1,3 and β- It is a polysaccharide. Such beta-glucan is contained in a large amount in the ear or barley, and particularly contains high-beta-glucan.

Processed foods using oats are disclosed in Korean Patent Laid-Open Publication No. 10-2003-0070513, in which powdered oats are dissolved in water to produce rice flour (Korean Patent Laid- (Korean Patent Laid-Open No. 10-2013-0087863). However, there is still a limit to the production of various processed foods, and there is a problem in that the nutritive aspects of oat The development of food is still very limited.

Accordingly, the inventors of the present invention have developed an oat drop mix having improved oat particle size with high beta-glucan content and improved functionality and preference while developing a food material with improved health and convenience, The present invention has been completed by showing that the mix can be usefully used as oat-consuming and oat processing food ingredients.

It is an object of the present invention to provide an oatmeal mix having a low blood glucose level and a high beta-glucan content and a method for producing the same.

In order to solve the above-mentioned problems, the present invention provides a method for manufacturing an infusion mix, which is prepared by mixing rice flour or wheat flour with 40 to 80 mesh oat or 80 to 120 mesh rice oats.

The present invention also provides an oatmeal mix produced by the method of the present invention.

The present invention relates to an oat drop mix having a high beta-glucan content and a method for producing the oat drop mix, and more particularly, to the development of a oat drop mix, 60 mesh showed the highest content of beta - glucan, while the addition of wheat flour to rice oats and rice flour to the outer rim showed lower glucose index (GI). The content of the beta-glucan, the degree of gelatinization, the blood glucose level and the degree of preference were investigated in the broth using an impregnation mix prepared by mixing the oat and grain powder having a high content of beta-glucan in various mixing ratios, , And the oat drop mix prepared by blending 40% oat with high beta-glucan content has the highest preference and functionality, the oat drop mix of the present invention and its manufacturing method can be used as a health food material .

Fig. 1 is a view showing the appearance according to the size of crushing by oat varieties.
2 is a diagram showing an oat grain size distribution with a high beta-glucan content;
2a shows a particle size distribution with a high content of oat beta-glucan,
Figure 2b is a particle size distribution with a high content of rice oat beta-glucan.
Fig. 3 is a graph showing the starch digestibility according to the crushing size of oat varieties; Fig.
FIG. 3A is a graph showing the starch digestibility according to the crushing size of crustacea,
FIG. 3B is a graph showing the starch digestibility according to the crushing size of rice oats.
FIG. 4 shows that a mixture of oats and grain flour (rice flour or wheat flour) is mixed with rice flour 100%, wheat flour: oat (50:50), rice flour: oat (50:50) ) Was manufactured in the same manner as in Example 1. FIG.
Fig. 5 is a view showing the appearance of a chopper according to a mixing ratio of grain powder replacement oat flour.

Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in detail.

The present invention provides a method for manufacturing an infusion mix, which is prepared by mixing rice flour or wheat flour in 40 to 80 mesh oat or 80 to 120 mesh rice oats.

The present invention also provides an oatmeal mix produced by the method of the present invention.

The oats may be cultivated or marketed without limitation, and any plant of the same genus may be used, but the present invention is not limited thereto.

The crust is preferably pulverized to 20 to 100 mesh, more preferably pulverized to 40 to 80 mesh, most preferably pulverized to 50 to 70 mesh. According to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, The size of the crusted oat grain is 60 mesh.

The rice oats are preferably pulverized to 60 to 140 mesh, more preferably to 80 to 120 mesh, and most preferably to 90 to 110 mesh. According to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the grain size of rice oats having a high beta-glucan content is 100 mesh.

It is most preferable that the mixing is carried out at a ratio of 10 to 40% by weight of the oat flour. According to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, when the oat flour of more than 40% by weight is mixed, there is a disadvantage that it is difficult to maintain shape as a flap, and when mixed at 40% by weight, the content of beta-glucan is the highest and the preference is excellent.

According to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, mixing the rice oats with wheat flour and oat flour with rice flour is effective in lowering the glucose index (GI) It is effective in development of infusion mix.

The infusion mix according to the present invention may further comprise prepared starch, if necessary, and includes tapioca starch, glycine, dextrin and the like. In addition, the infusion mix further comprises 5 to 10% by weight of conventional ingredients such as an appropriate amount of corn flour, Jimmy fortified base, baking powder, sugar, salt, onion powder, garlic powder, soy flour, pepper powder, .

In addition, the infusion mix composition according to the present invention may further optionally contain a dried vegetable selected from par, onion, garlic, zucchini, potato, leek, green onion, carrot and pepper, , Soy sauce, pepper, red pepper powder, ginger, onion, and garlic. The dry vegetable may be included in the infusion mix at an arbitrary ratio depending on the use, or may be provided separately packaged.

In a specific embodiment of the present invention, the present inventors investigated the general components of the oat varieties to make an oatmeal mix having a high content of beta-glucan, and examined the chromaticity and beta-glucan content according to the particle size, Crude fat content, total starch, amylose content, gelatinization characteristics, starch digestibility and eGI were investigated. As a result, grain size (mesh star) having a high content of beta-glucan was selected as 60 mesh of outer oats and 100 mesh of rice oats for the preparation of oat drop mix (see Tables 1 to 10).

In addition, 60 mesh and oat (100 mesh) having a particle size of a high content of beta-glucan were mixed at various mixing ratios and made into a blender. In this case, rice flour or wheat flour was mixed with the grain flour. When the oat flour mixture was more than 50%, it was difficult to maintain its shape as a clogger. In oat flour production and quality inspection, oats were produced by mixing the oat flour content within 40% Reference).

The appearance, color, absorbency, crude fat, moisture content and physical properties of the broth prepared in various mixing ratios were examined (see Tables 11 to 13), and the content of betaglucan and total starch As a result of analysis of content, it was found that the content of betaglucan was increased by increasing the mixing ratio of oats, and there was no difference in content according to the kinds of cultivars (see Table 14). Therefore, it was concluded that 40% of the optimum mixing ratio of cereal flour and oat flour is appropriate in terms of the content of betaclucan, which is the selection criterion of the infusion mix.

The eGI value for the selection of the proper grains of the cereal added oat flour mixture was investigated. As a result, the rice oat flour mix at the flour base, It was confirmed that the eGI value was lower in the oat flour mix for the rice flour base, and it was confirmed that mixing the oat flour with rice oat and the rice flour with the oat flour were effective in developing functional immersion mix with low glucose index (GI) 18).

As a result of the preference test, 40% of the oat flour was the best in the treatments which showed better overall preference according to the addition of oats compared to the grain flour, but there was no significant difference between 10 and 40% of the rice oat. Therefore, it was judged that the optimum mixing ratio of the oat-added mix was proper at 40% (see Table 19). Accordingly, the oat drop mix having a low blood sugar level and a high beta-glucan content and a manufacturing method thereof according to the present invention broaden the application range of the native food using the oat ingredient and can be usefully used as a health food material.

Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in detail with reference to Examples and Experimental Examples.

However, the following Examples and Experimental Examples are merely illustrative of the present invention, and the contents of the present invention are not limited by the following Examples and Experimental Examples.

<Example 1> Examination of general composition of oats according to oat varieties

In the present invention, rice oats (Chaiyang) and oat (Chojang) cultivars produced by the Jeonbuk Jeongeup Oat Rice Project in Jeonbuk Province in 2014 were used, and imported oats (barley herb, Canadian) were purchased from the market.

Moisture content, ash, crude fat, crude protein and dietary fiber of oat varieties were measured to produce an oatmeal mix with high beta - glucan content. Specifically, the moisture content, ash, crude fat, crude protein and other general components were measured by the 105 ° C atmospheric pressure heating method according to AOAC standard method. The crude protein was analyzed by Kjeldahl method, the crude fiber was analyzed by dry method and the crude fat was analyzed by Soxhlet extraction method And the ash was quantitated by weight method directly in a painting furnace at 600 ℃. Carbohydrates were obtained by subtracting the sum of the contents (%) of moisture, crude protein, crude fat and ash from 100%. Dietary fiber was extracted using a fiber-optic extractor (Fibertek 1023 system, Foss SWE). After adding 40 μl of MES / TRIS solution to 1.0 ± 0.005 g of powder, 50 μl of α-amylase was mixed and dispersed. The mixture was stirred in a water bath (95 ° C) for 40 minutes, cooled to 60 ° C, And the mixture was incubated in a water bath for 30 minutes with stirring at 60 ° C. Then, 5 mL of 0.561N HCl was added and mixed, and the pH was adjusted to 4.0 to 4.7 at 60 ° C. After that, 200 μl of amyloglucosidase was added, and the mixture was stirred at 60 ° C for 30 minutes, and then the mixture was incubated and used as a test solution. To the test solution was added 200 mL of 95% ethanol at 60 DEG C and allowed to stand at room temperature for 1 hour to precipitate. 0.5 g of celite was added to a constant weight glass filter, and 15 mL of 78% ethanol was added to disperse it. Then, the test solution was added to the filtrate, and the residue of the container was washed with 78% ethanol. The residue was washed twice with 78% ethanol, 95% ethanol and acetone, respectively, and dried in a 105 ° C dryer for one day. After cooling, weighing was performed, and one filter residue was subjected to crude protein and the other filter residue was subjected to aspiration, and the dietary fiber content was calculated using the following equation.

(%) = (Mean residue weight of specimen (mg) -P-A-B) / average weight of specimen (mg) * 100

P: protein amount (mg), A: ash content (mg), B: blank test value (mg)

As a result, as shown in Table 1, the content of rice (91.48%) was the highest in the carbohydrate, the imported oats (79.89%), the rice oats (73.33% ) And oat (74.93%), respectively (Table 1). The contents of ash, crude fat and crude protein were higher in rice than those of rice, oat, oat, and imported oat.

division Oat Rice oats Imported oats rice carbohydrate 74.93 + - 0.13 ^{c1 )} 73.33 + - 0.34 ^d 79.89 ± 0.29 ^b 91.48 ± 0.09 ^a Ash 1.92 + 0.18 ^b 2.10 0.04 ^a 1.80 + 0.02 ^b 0.40 0.03 ^c Crude fat 7.78 ± 0.32 ^b 8.65 ± 0.05 ^a 4.83 ± 0.25 ^c 0.39 + 0.02 ^d Crude protein 15.37 ± 0.43 ^b 15.92 + 0.31 ^a 13.49 + 0.08 ^c 7.73 ± 0.08 ^d

^{1) The} different alphabets in the same row mean a significant difference from each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

In addition, as shown in Table 2, insoluble and soluble dietary fiber content was about 10 times higher than that of rice, although there was no significant difference between the oat varieties (Table 2).

division Oat Rice oats Imported oats rice Insoluble fiber 12.91 + 2.03 ^{a1 )} 11.97 ± 1.62 ^a 10.37 + 0.40 ^a 1.42 ± 0.07 ^b Soluble fiber 5.17 ± 0.44 ^a 5.48 ± 0.87 ^a 4.87 ± 0.71 ^a 0.34 + 0.08 ^b Total dietary fiber 18.09 ± 1.61 ^a 17.44 ± 1.12 ^a 15.24 ± 1.10 ^b 1.76 + - 0.14 ^c

^{1) The} different alphabets in the same row mean a significant difference from each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

<Example 2> Confirmation of Colors According to Particle Sizes of Oat Varieties

Oat flour was prepared with 40, 60, 80, and 100 mesh, respectively, by using a pin mill to grind the oats and to differentiate the mesh of the discharge body.

Specifically. L (lightness), a (redness) and b (yellowness) were measured by using a chromatic meter (CR-300, Minolta Co., Tokyo, Japan) according to the manufacturer's instructions.

As a result, as shown in Table 3, the L value was higher than that of rice oats, and the brightness increased with increasing mesh size, and the brightness of oat powder crushed by 80 mesh was the brightest (Table 3). The value of a was higher than that of rice oats, while the value of a was higher than that of rice oats, while the value of b was higher than that of rice oats (Table 3).

kind Mesh L a b Oat 40 79.09 ± 0.00 ^{d1 )} 2.41 ± 0.01 ^a 11.68 + - 0.01 ^g 60 79.30 ± 0.01 ^c 2.42 + 0.01 ^a 11.96 ± 0.01 ^f 80 80.22 ± 0.00 ^a 2.19 ± 0.01 ^b 12.13 + - 0.01 ^d 100 80.14 + 0.01 ^b 2.13 0.02 ^c 12.03 ± 0.01 ^e Rice oats 40 76.29 ± 0.00 ^h 2.06 ± 0.01 ^d 11.97 ± 0.01 ^f 60 77.37 ± 0.00 ^f 2.03 ± 0.01 ^e 12.29 ± 0.00 ^c 80 77.53 + 0.01 ^e 1.93 ± 0.00 ^g 12.58 + - 0.01 ^b 100 77.07 ± 0.00 ^g 1.97 ± 0.00 ^f 12.78 ± 0.01 ^a

^{1) The} different alphabets located in the same column indicate a significant difference between each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

&Lt; Example 3 > Particle size analysis according to crushing size by oat varieties

The grain sizes of oat varieties were analyzed according to their size.

Specifically, the particle size of pulverized oat flour was measured by repeating 3 times repeatedly after taking 2 g of oat flour powder using Particle Size Analyzer (HELOS, Berlin, Germany).

As a result, as shown in Table 4 and FIG. 1, the grain size according to the crushing size was generally higher in the oats of rice oats than in the side oats, and the smaller the crushing mesh, the greater the grain size. 100 mesh showed no significant difference (FIG. 1 and Table 4).

Particle size (median, μm) kind 40 mesh 60 mesh 80 mesh 100 mesh Rice oats 174.72 +/- 10.93 ^{a1 )} 64.70 ± 0.87 ^b 42.77 + - 2.57 ^c 43.98 + - 3.56 ^c Oat 128.28 + - 9.23 ^a 57.15 ± 2.91 ^b 36.58 ± 1.68 ^c 32.66 + - 0.50 ^c

^{1) The} different alphabets in the same row mean a significant difference from each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

Example 4 Confirmation of Beta Glucan Content According to Particle Sizes of Oat Varieties

In order to select oats with excellent beta - glucan content, beta - glucan content was determined by grain size according to oat varieties.

First, the content of betaglucan was determined according to the crushing size, and the particle size distribution of betaglucan content was determined according to oat varieties and crushing size.

Specifically, the content of beta-glucan was determined by using a Megazyme kit (K-BGLU). To 500 mg of the sample, 1 mL of 50% (v / v) ethanol was added and stirred, 4.0 mL of 20 mM sodium phosphate buffer (pH 6.5) was added, and the mixture was reacted at 100 ° C. for 6 minutes. 0.2 ml of lichenase (10 units) was added to the extract, and the mixture was treated at 40 ° C for 1 hour. The supernatant was centrifuged (1,000 × g, 10 min) using 30 ml of distilled water. 0.1 mL of the supernatant is added to each of three test tubes, 0.1 mL of 50 mM sodium acetate buffer (pH 4.0) is added to one test tube, and 0.1 mL of β-glucosidase is added to the remaining two test tubes Followed by reaction at 40 ° C for 15 minutes. 3 mL of glucose oxidase / peroxidase reagent was added to the reaction solution, and the reaction was carried out at 40 ° C for 20 minutes. Then, the absorbance was measured at 510 nm, and the content of beta-glucan was finally determined.

As a result, as shown in Table 5, the content of beta-glucan was 3.20 ~ 4.23% in the oat, 3.40 ~ 4.26% in the oat of rice, and the total beta-glucan content was lower in the oat except for 40 mesh On the other hand, rice oats showed an increasing tendency (Table 5). It was confirmed that the fat soluble beta - glucan increased with increasing mesh and the water - soluble beta - glucan ratio decreased.

kind Mesh Beta glucan content (g / 100 g) Water Soluble Ratio (%) gun Liposuction receptivity Oat 40 4.02 ± 0.23 ^{ab1 )} 0.37 + 0.03 ^b 3.65 90.80 60 4.23 ± 0.43 ^a 0.58 ± 0.00 ^ab 3.65 86.29 80 3.52 ± 0.00 ^bc 0.81 ± 0.10 ^a 2.71 76.99 100 3.20 ± 0.08 ^c 0.72 ± 0.17 ^a 2.48 77.50 Rice oats 40 3.58 ± 0.15 ^bc 0.37 + 0.01 ^b 3.22 89.94 60 3.40 ± 0.54 ^bc 0.59 ± 0.10 ^ab 2.81 82.65 80 3.68 ± 0.05 ^abc 0.77 + 0.15 ^a 2.91 79.08 100 4.26 + 0.04 ^a 0.80 + 0.13 ^a 3.46 81.22

^{1) The} different alphabets located in the same column indicate a significant difference between each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

As shown in FIG. 2 and Table 6, the content of beta-glucan was different depending on the particle size and the content of beta-glucan was 5 (45-55%) and 10% (40-60%), respectively, and the particle size distribution region with high beta-glucan content was selected. That is, it was confirmed that the content of beta-glucan was high in the rice oats 100 mesh (150 μm) and the oat 60 mesh (250 μm) (FIG. 2 and Table 6).

kind Mesh Beta glucan content (g / 100 g) Particle size according to cumulative curve distribution (㎛) 50% 45 to 55% 40 to 60% Rice oats 40 3.58 ± 0.15 ^{bc1 )} 166.99 135-210 100-250 60 3.40 ± 0.54 ^bc 65.31 57-80 44-100 80 3.68 ± 0.05 ^abc 44.59 39-52 34-60 100 4.26 + 0.04 ^a 41.46 36-48 32-52 Oat 40 4.02 ± 0.23 ^ab 134.81 100-180 74-259 60 4.23 ± 0.43 ^a 55.09 44-73 36-100 80 3.52 ± 0.00 ^bc 37.77 33-46 28-52 100 3.20 ± 0.08 ^c 33.01 28-38 26-44

^{1) The} different alphabets located in the same column indicate a significant difference between each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

Based on the results of Examples and Experimental Examples, 60 grams of oat flour and 100 grams of oat rice were selected for the development of oat flour powder having improved palatability and functionality.

<Example 5> Determination of crude fat content according to oat varieties and pulverization size

The crude fat content according to the crushed size was confirmed.

Specifically, the crude fat of rice oats and crusted oats crushed at a crushing size of 40, 60, 80, and 100 mesh was measured in the same manner as the crude fat measurement method of Example 1 above.

As a result, as shown in Table 7, crude fat content of rice oats was 8.77 ~ 9.54% and that of oats was 7.60 ~ 8.95%. Overall, crude fat content of rice oats was high, and crude fat content (Table 7). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups.

Grinding size (mesh) Crude fat (%) Rice oats Oat 40 9.54 ± 0.86 ^{ab1 )} 7.60 + - 0.70 ^d 60 8.85 ± 0.70 ^bc 8.44 ± 0.38 ^cd 80 9.85 ± 0.32 ^a 8.95 ± 0.37 ^bc 100 8.77 ± 0.56 ^bc 8.46 ± 0.44 ^cd

^{1) The} different alphabets mean a significant difference from each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

< Example  6> Depending on the crushing size of oat varieties Total starch , Amylose Content and Characterization

Total starch and amylose content were determined by oat varieties and grain sizes.

Specifically, total starch and amylose content were determined by the Megazyme kit (K-TSTA) and Megazyme kit (K-AMYL), respectively.

Total starch analysis of oats was performed by adding 0.2 mL of 80% (v / v) ethanol and 2 mL of dimethyl sulphoxide to 100 mg of sample, adding 3 mL of thermostable α-amylase solution and reacting at 100 ° C for 6 minutes. Then, 0.1 mL of amyloglucosidase was added and the mixture was reacted at 50 DEG C for 30 minutes. The reacted samples were diluted to 100 mL, centrifuged, and added with 3 mL of the glucose oxidase / peroxidase reagent to 0.1 mL of the supernatant, reacted at 50 ° C for 20 minutes, and the absorbance at 510 nm was measured to determine the starch content. D-glucose was used as a standard substance and corn starch was used as a control group.

To analyze the content of amylose in oats, 1 mL of dimethyl sulphoxide was added to 20 mg of sample, and the reaction was carried out for 15 minutes. Then, 6 mL of 95% ethanol was added and reacted at 100 ° C. for 15 minutes. After centrifugation at 2000 × g for 5 minutes, the precipitate was dissolved in 25 mL concanavalin A solvent and reacted with 0.5 mL of concanavalin A reagent for 1 hour. After the reaction was completed, the sample was centrifuged at 14,000 × g for 10 minutes, and 3 mL of 100 mM sodium acetate buffer (pH 4.5) and 0.1 mL of amyloglucosicase-amylase solution were added to 1 mL of the supernatant. After centrifugation at 2000 × g for 5 minutes, 1 mL of supernatant was taken and reacted with 4 mL of glucose oxidase / peroxidase reagent at 40 ° C. for 30 minutes, and the absorbance was measured at 510 nm.

In addition, the enrichment characteristics were measured using an RVA (Rapid Visco Analyzer-4, Newport Scientific Pty, Ltd., Warriewood NSW, Australia). 3 g of a sample (based on 14% moisture content) was dispersed in 25 ml of distilled water in an aluminum container, followed by rapid stirring to prepare a sample liquid. The moisture content of oat flour was measured. The amount of distilled water was varied according to the type of cereal and water content according to the manual of 14% moisture content, and the total water amount was corrected. The gelatinization condition was maintained at 50 ° C for 1 minute, then heated to 95 ° C at 12 ° C per minute, maintained at 95 ° C for 2 minutes and 30 seconds, cooled to 50 ° C at 12 ° C per minute, Were measured. From the RVA viscogram, peak viscosity, trough viscosity, final viscosity, pasting temperature, breakdown (peak-trough), setback (final-trough) peak time), and the viscosity was expressed as a Rapid Viscosity Unit (RVU).

As a result, as shown in Table 8, total starch showed a tendency to decrease as the mesh was increased, and the total amount of starch (63.64 ~ 69.82%) was higher than that of rice oats (52.45 ~ 63.71% (Table 8).

Amylose contents of the oats were higher than those of rice oats. Amylose content of oat crumbs was higher than that of rice oats, while amylose content of rice oats was the lowest , 80 and 100 mesh showed no significant difference (Table 8).

kind Mesh Total starch (g / 100 g) Amylose (g / 100 g) Oat 40 69.82 ± 0.82 ^{a1 )} 7.54 ± 0.07 ^cd 60 67.63 ± 0.58 ^b 8.51 0.33 ^b 80 65.39 ± 1.12 ^c 12.34 ± 0.09 ^a 100 63.64 ± 1.02 ^e 12.92 + 0.23 ^a Rice oats 40 63.71 + 1.42 ^d 5.47 ± 0.20 ^e 60 58.28 + - 0.41 ^f 7.00 ± 0.19 ^d 80 52.45 ± 2.01 ^h 7.94 + - 0.72 ^bc 100 54.43 + - 1.09 ^g 7.67 ± 0.00 ^cd

^{1) The} different alphabets located in the same column indicate a significant difference between each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

In addition, as shown in Table 9, compared with the oat of rice, the overall appearance was higher than that of the oat, and the peak, the minimum viscosity, and the falling viscosity were highest at 100 mesh regardless of the varieties Table 9). In addition, there were no significant differences in the initial initiation temperature of 40 mesh, 83.72 ° C of outer oats, and 87.48 ° C of oats of rice and 60 ~ 100 mesh.

kind smash
(mesh) Peak
Peak viscosity (RVU) Trough (RVU) Breakdown
(RVU) Final viscosity
(Final Viscosity) (RVU) Setback
(RVU) Peak Time
(min) Pasting Temp (℃) Oat 40 169.17 ± 2.38 ^dl) 119.72 ± 0.95 ^cd 49.44 ± 2.09 ^d 367.50 ± 16.33 ^b 247.78 ± 17.15 ^b 5.82 + 0.08 ^c 83.72 ± 6.60 ^a 60 201.22 ± 5.09 ^bc 134.17 ± 6.47 ^b 67.06 ± 1.79 ^bc 424.44 + - 3.54 ^a 290.28 ± 3.29 ^a 6.07 ± 0.14 ^b 73.10 ± 9.61 ^b 80 196.36 ± 12.05 ^c 121.67 + - 4.20 ^c 74.70 ± 10.42 ^a 364.39 ± 10.51 ^b 242.72 ± 6.51 ^bc 6.16 ± 0.20 ^ab 68.85 ± 4.72 ^b 100 215.08 ± 9.56 ^a 146.22 ± 9.01 ^a 68.86 + 2.96 ^abc 382.78 +/- 12.51 ^b 236.56 ± 4.59 ^bc 6.29 + 0.03 ^a 64.85 ± 2.06 ^b Rice oats 40 151.61 ± 3.01 ^f 100.39 + 1.70 ^e 51.22 + 1.44 ^d 338.45 ± 2.86 ^c 238.0 + - 1.42 ^bc 5.62 + 0.04 ^d 87.48 ± 0.88 ^a 60 180.75 + - 6.04 ^d 112.84 ± 5.68 ^d 68.86 ± 1.38 ^abc 345.36 ± 13.32 ^c 232.53 7.65 ^c 5.85 ± 0.04 ^c 67.55 ± 2.86 ^b 80 161.28 ± 5.75 ^ef 98.72 ± 5.08 ^e 62.56 + - 2.53 ^c 303.94 ± 11.68 ^d 205.22 ± 6.79 ^d 6.02 + 0.04 ^b 72.82 + - 10.03 ^b 100 210.00 ± 8.37 ^ab 136.55 占 6.35 ^b 73.44 ± 2.05 ^ab 298.47 ± 8.31 ^d 161.92 ± 1.97 ^e 6.11 + 0.03 ^b 63.20 ± 0.52 ^b

^{1) The} different alphabets located in the same column indicate a significant difference between each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

<Example 7> Determination of starch digestibility and eGI according to crushing size of oat varieties

Starch digestibility and eGI were determined according to crushing size of oat varieties.

The starch digestibility was determined by the modified method of Englyst et al., And 0.45 g of porcine pancreatin (P-7545, Sigma Aldrich, St. Louis, Mo., USA) was dispersed in 4 mL of distilled water and centrifuged Min), and 2.7 mL of the supernatant was separated. 0.32 mL of amyloglucosidase (A-7095, Sigma-Aldrich) was mixed with 0.4 mL of distilled water. 0.4 mL of diluted amyloglucosidase was taken and starch degrading enzyme was prepared by mixing 2.7 mL of the previously prepared porcine pancreatin supernatant. To 100 mg of the starch sample, 2 mL of 0.05 M HCl, 0.01 g of pepsin and 10 glass beads (4 mm in diameter) were added and stirred at a constant rate (150 rpm) 1 mL of the prepared starch hydrolyzing enzyme was added and reacted at 37 ° C. The glucose concentration was measured by glucose oxidase and peroxidase assay kits (GAGO-20, Sigma-Aldrich) after mixing with 80% ethanol solution for each hour (0-180 min) The digestible starch content was measured by RDS (rapid digestible starch), the digestible starch content between 20 minutes and 120 minutes by SDS (slowly digestible starch) The content was analyzed by RS (resistant starch).

The expected glycemic index (eGI) was measured by the method of Goni et al. Specifically, the hydrolysis index (HI) was calculated as the area ratio of the digestibility curve of the oat sample and the standard bread (white bread) eGI = 39.71 + 0.549 HI).

As a result, as shown in Table 10 and FIG. 3, the starch digestibility was lower than that of rice oats, and the starch digestibility of crust of the crust was higher than that of rice oats ).

On the other hand, eGI values were lower than those of rice oats, while those of 40 to 60 meshes in the oats and 40 and 100mesh in the oats of rice were low (Table 10). As a result of analysis of GI based on the bread (100), the GI values of rice oats (76.57 ~ 84.91) were higher than those of the oat (80.95 ~ 93.18), and the larger the mesh, the higher the eGI was, In the case of rice oats, 100 mesh was lower than 80 mesh and showed the same level as 60 mesh.

This is considered to be in accordance with the concept of mix development, low calorie and low GI in relation to selection of grain size of oat drop mix.

kind smash
(Mesh) Starch digestion fraction ^{1 )} (%) eGI ^{2 )} RDS SDS RS Oat 40 25.58 ± 1.02 ^{c3 )} 32.19 ± 2.72 ^ab 42.23 + 1.70 ^a 76.57 ± 1.17 ^d 60 32.37 ± 2.81 ^bc 31.87 ± 5.78 ^ab 35.77 ± 8.59 ^ab 81.35 ± 2.47 ^cd 80 42.71 ± 2.18 ^ab 23.99 + 8.89 ^b 33.82 ± 5.98 ^ab 84.12 ± 3.51 ^bcd 100 32.42 + - 2.61 ^bc 36.38 ± 6.71 ^ab 31.21 ± 9.32 ^ab 84.91 ± 3.54 ^bc Rice oats 40 26.20 ± 1.68 ^c 40.15 ± 9.87 ^a 33.66 ± 11.55 ^ab 80.95 ± 4.88 ^cd 60 36.41 + - 8.14 ^abc 41.59 ± 1.83 ^a 22.01 ± 6.31 ^bc 90.13 ± 3.17 ^ab 80 49.25 + - 8.59 ^a 40.61 ± 2.72 ^a 10.15 ± 5.88 ^c 93.18 + 2.04 ^a 100 35.90 +/- 8.50 ^bc 36.82 ± 2.40 ^ab 27.28 6.10 ^abc 87.40 ± 3.92 ^abc

¹⁾ RDS (fast digestible starch) is a fast digestible star; SDS (slowly digestible starch) is a slowly digestible starch; and RS (resistant starch) is an undigested starch.

²⁾ eGI (expected glycemic index) indicates the expected blood glucose index.

^{3) The} different alphabets in the same column mean a significant difference from each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

Based on the results of Examples 1 to 7, for the development of an oatmeal mix, a grain size having a high content of beta-glucan was selected as 60 oat and 100 oat rice oats, It was developed as an infusion mix material.

<Experimental Example 1> Production of oat floss (before)

(60 mesh) and rice oats (100 mesh) having a high beta-glucan content were mixed at various mixing ratios based on the results of Examples 1 to 7, .

First, dough was made into four groups of rice flour 100%, wheat flour: oat (50:50), rice flour: oat (50:50) and raw oats 100%.

As a result, as shown in Fig. 4, in the case of a flour made of oat flour added in an amount of 50% or more, the surface was not flat and uneven, and it was difficult to maintain the shape such as tearing of the outer surface (Fig. Thus, in the manufacture of oat floss and quality inspection, the content of oats was adjusted to within 40% to prepare a floss.

In order to ensure the quality reproducibility of the ooze mix according to the oat mixing ratio and to examine the quality characteristics, the bladder was manufactured by the following method.

The flour and rice flour mixed with oat flour were prepared by measuring the moisture content of wheat flour, rice flour and oat flour, respectively, and adding water to make the dough moisture to 63%. The dough was made into a circular stainless steel having a diameter of 8 ㎝ and a height of 0.5 ㎝ A steel frame was used. The mold was filled with 5 ml of a sufficient amount of oil, and 25 ml of the dough was poured to prepare a uniform size and uniform thickness. The frying pan was heated for 5 minutes at a constant temperature (150 ℃) using an electronic frying pan, which was kept at a constant temperature during the manufacturing process. After cooling for 10 minutes, the weight was measured and used as a sample for measuring physical properties and quality characteristics.

<Experimental Example 2> Appearance and colorimetric analysis of the clam (front) by oat mixture ratio

The outer appearance and chromaticity of the oat flour made by the method of <Experimental Example 1> were examined.

Specifically, the chromaticity of the decanter was examined in the same manner as in Example 2 using a colorimeter (Chroma Meter, CR-300, Minolta Co., Tokyo, Japan).

As a result, as shown in FIG. 5 and Table 11, the L value decreased and the a value increased with increasing oat addition rate regardless of the oat varieties. On the other hand, b value was significantly lower than that of whole rice flour before control, and b value increased with increasing oat addition ratio.

Mixing ratio (%) CIE color values L * a * b * Rice oats Oat Rice oats Oat Rice oats Oat Flour: Oat
(100: 0) 65.59 + 0.02 ^a1) 65.59 + 0.02 ^a 1.31
± 0.30 ^d 1.31
± 0.30 ^d 24.51 ± 0.99 ^a 24.51 + - 0.99 ^c Flour: Oat
(90:10) 61.01 + - 0.15 ^b 66.77 ± 1.11 ^a 1.98
± 0.25 ^c 2.75
± 0.19 ^c 23.16 ± 0.30 ^ab 28.25 ± 2.90 ^bc Flour: Oat
(80:20) 58.30 ± 0.80 ^c 62.41 + - 0.80 ^b 2.37
± 0.35 ^bc 3.63
± 0.28 ^b 22.57 ± 1.12 ^b 34.85 ± 3.52 ^a Flour: Oat
(70:30) 55.68 + - 0.14 ^d 62.33 + - 1.67 ^b 2.88
± 0.13 ^ab 3.50
± 0.07 ^bc 23.98 ± 0.26 ^b 30.17 ± 1.77 ^ab Flour: Oat
(60:40) 54.76 ± 0.43 ^d 59.43 + - 0.17 ^c 3.29
± 0.04 ^a 5.15
± 0.93 ^a 24.54 + 0.17 ^a 33.30 ± 3.74 ^ab Rice Flour: Oat
(100: 0) 78.05 + 0.02 ^a 78.05 + 0.02 ^a -2.67 0.02 ^c -2.67 0.02 ^c 11.84 ± 0.00 ^e 11.84 ± 0.00 ^c Rice Flour: Oat
(90:10) 63.24 + 0.88 ^b 68.55 ± 1.82 ^b 2.60
± 0.63 ^c 1.50
± 0.37 ^b 27.92 ± 3.21 ^d 23.42 ± 1.95 ^b Rice Flour: Oat
(80:20) 57.56 ± 0.71 ^c 66.24 ± 1.86 ^b 3.92
± 0.43 ^b 2.83
± 1.39 ^ab 35.73 + - 0.10 ^c 23.24 ± 3.89 ^b Rice flour: Oats (70:30) 51.75 ± 1.02 ^d 60.15 ± 1.88 ^c 7.28
± 0.32 ^a 4.20
± 0.87 ^a 45.43 + 1.63 ^a 31.47 ± 2.43 ^a Rice Flour: Oat
(60:40) 51.79 ± 0.44 ^d 62.07 + - 2.51 ^c 6.42
± 0.41 ^a 4.32
± 1.52 ^a 39.60 ± 3.18 ^b 29.04 + 4.56 ^a

^{1) The} different alphabets located in the same column indicate a significant difference between each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

<Experimental Example 3> Analysis of the absorption rate, crude fat and moisture content of the broth according to the mixing ratio of oats

The absorption rate, crude lipid and moisture content of broiler were investigated by oat mixing ratio.

Specifically, moisture content and fat content were analyzed according to the AOAC method, and each sample was repeated three times and the average value was expressed as%. The weight of the dough and the weight of the dough before and after the dough were measured and used for the absorption rate calculation. The absorption rate was calculated by the following equation, which is the amount of oil absorbed during the production of a certain amount of dough.

Absorption rate (%) = (ratio of weight of 100g fat x paste before) - fat of 100g dough

As a result, as shown in Table 12, the absorption rate of the former was different according to the moisture content and the crude fat content of the blusher, and the absorption rate of the former was higher than that of the latter, regardless of the breed, and the moisture content was 40.59 ~ 53.46% and crude fat 4.83 ~ 11.27%, respectively.

Mixing ratio (%) Absorption rate (%) Crude fat (%) Water content (%) Rice oats Oat Rice oats Oat Rice oats Oat Flour: Oat
(100: 0) 6.52 ± 0.25 ^ab1) 6.52
± 0.25 ^c 6.20
± 0.22 ^b 6.20
± 0.22 ^b 40.59 + - 4.58 ^c 40.59 + - 4.58 ^c Flour: Oat
(90:10) 5.22
± 0.51 ^b 5.31
± 0.08 ^d 4.83
± 0.43 ^b 8.16
± 0.34 ^ab 48.93 + - 0.52 ^b 50.00 ± 1.61 ^b Flour: Oat
(80:20) 8.23
± 1.45 ^a 9.88
± 0.07 ^a 8.21
± 1.32 ^a 8.27
± 2.45 ^ab 52.04 ± 1.03 ^a 50.97 ± 1.36 ^ab Flour: Oat
(70:30) 8.40
± 0.26 ^a 9.98
± 0.17 ^a 8.94
± 0.25 ^a 10.33 ± 1.09 ^a 52.23 +/- 1.47 ^a 52.92 + 0.66 ^a Flour: Oat
(60:40) 7.99
± 0.18 ^a 9.46
± 0.08 ^b 8.75
± 0.16 ^a 7.47
± 0.26 ^ab 52.80 ± 1.26 ^a 53.46 ± 0.08 ^a Rice Flour: Oat
(100: 0) 7.63
± 0.62 ^c 7.63
± 0.62 ^d 5.32
± 0.52 ^e 5.32
± 0.52 ^b 46.25
± 1.51 46.25 + 1.51 ^b Rice Flour: Oat
(90:10) 7.15
± 0.41 ^d 6.32
± 0.02 ^e 6.53
± 0.34 ^d 7.09
± 0.67 ^b 46.68
± 3.31 46.64 + 0.04 ^b Rice Flour: Oat
(80:20) 7.69
± 0.30 ^b 7.92
± 0.05 ^c 7.80
± 0.25 ^b 7.63
± 0.99 ^b 47.81
± 1.25 49.17 ± 0.06 ^a Rice flour: Oats (70:30) 8.22
± 0.32 ^a 8.90
± 0.07 ^a 8.85
± 0.20 ^a 10.19 + 0.04 ^a 45.62
± 0.13 40.82 + - 0.25 ^c Rice Flour: Oat
(60:40) 6.88
± 0.42 ^e 8.50
± 0.01 ^b 7.43
± 0.36 ^c 11.27 ± 1.57 ^a 47.86
± 3.15 41.24 ± 0.26 ^c

^{1) The} different alphabets located in the same column indicate a significant difference between each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

<Experimental Example 4> Analysis of physical properties of the humidifier by the mixing ratio of oats

The physical properties of the broccoli (before) according to the mixing ratio of oats were confirmed.

Specifically, the physical properties of the blusher were measured using a texture analyzer (TA-XT.plus, Stable Micro Systems Co. Ltd., London, England).

As a result, as shown in Table 13, the cohesion and adhesiveness of the wheat flour using rice oats tended to decrease, while the cohesiveness and adhesiveness of the oat flour before rice flour increased significantly , And wheat flour showed no significant difference (Table 13).

In addition, all the properties such as hardness, elasticity and chewiness were higher in the control flour before the rice flour than in the case of rice flour before the mixing of flour and oat regardless of the varieties. (Table 13).

Oat type
Mixing ratio (%) Hardness (g) Springiness Cohesiveness Gumminess Chewiness Flour: Oat rice (100: 0) 26570.58 + - 390.48 ^a1) 1.10 0.29 ^b 0.58 ± 0.04 ^ab 15369.65 ± 1239.67 ^a 16655.06 ± 2922.41 ^a Flour: Rice Oat
(90:10) 15663.93 + 1434.41 ^b 0.89 ± 0.08 ^b 0.63 + 0.03 ^a 9843.33 ± 916.99 ^b 8728.64 ± 1243.39 ^bc Flour: Rice Oat
(80:20) 14515.23 ± 1413.16 ^b 1.70 + 0.63 ^a 0.56 + 0.03 ^b 8170.18 + - 862.69 ^c 14014.24 ± 5569.51 ^ab Flour: Rice Oat
(70:30) 15184.27 ± 956.26 ^b 0.95 ± 0.05 ^b 0.54 + 0.03 ^bc 8243.27 ± 963.37 ^c 7869.33 + - 1365.35 ^c Flour: Rice Oat
(60:40) 14905.11 ± 35.18 ^b 0.82 ± 0.19 ^b 0.49 + 0.01 ^c 7314.38 ± 133.76 ^c 6013.20 + - 1517.39 ^c Rice flour: rice oats (100: 0) 18641.51 ± 569.39 ^ab 0.48 + 0.04 0.44 ± 0.02 ^ab 8258.95 ± 577.09 ^a 4002.33 + - 574.88 Rice Flour: Rice Oat
(90:10) 19216.60 ± 1269.22 ^a 0.54 + - 0.12 0.43 ± 0.03 ^bc 8168.79 ± 961.20 ^a 4456.90 ± 1242.50 Rice Flour: Rice Oat
(80:20) 18949.47 ± 1275.06 ^ab 0.41 + 0.17 0.40 ± 0.01 ^cd 7525.94 ± 528.68 ^ab 3047.76 ± 1117.39 Rice Flour: Rice Oat
(70:30) 17424.22 ± 374.34 ^b 0.44 ± 0.09 0.37 + 0.03 ^d 6487.71 + - 569.16 ^b 2873.60 810.55 Rice Flour: Rice Oat
(60:40) 17430.91 + 499.56 ^b 0.40 0.11 0.47 + 0.01 ^a 8154.48 +/- 405.02 ^a 3271.02 + - 751.47 Flour: Oatmeal (100: 0) 26570.58 +/- 390.48 ^a 1.10 ± 0.29 ^ab 0.58 + 0.04 15369.65 ± 1236.67 ^a 16655.06 ± 2922.41 ^ab Wheat flour: oat
(90:10) 19887.42 ± 1869.74 ^c 0.78 ± 0.17 ^b 0.53 + 0.02 10462.01 占 1299.71 ^b 8079.33 ± 1951.07 ^bc Wheat flour: oat
(80:20) 19042.08 ± 1834.06 ^c 0.68 + 0.14 ^b 0.47 ± 0.05 9005.84 ± 1812.57 ^b 6303.84 + - 2556.86 ^c Wheat flour: oat
(70:30) 17317.80 ± 2593.17 ^c 0.82 + 0.22 ^b 0.56 ± 0.21 9978.39 ± 5280.36 ^b 8810.10 ± 6853.60 ^bc Wheat flour: oat
(60:40) 23028.65 ± 2183.68 ^b 1.49 ± 0.65 ^a 0.53 + 0.08 12201.10 ± 1935.51 ^ab 18880.23 ± 10290.04 ^a Rice flour: Oatmeal (100: 0) 18641.51 + 569.39 ^b 0.48 + 0.04 0.44 0.02 ^a 8258.95 ± 577.09 ^a 4002.33 + - 574.88 ^a Rice flour: Oatmeal
(90:10) 21901.10 ± 1525.35 ^a 0.50 0.06 0.41 ± 0.02 ^ab 8952.00 ± 534.16 ^a 4420.88 + - 431.82 ^a Rice flour: Oatmeal
(80:20) 21703.29 ± 1025.37 ^a 0.47 + 0.14 0.40 ± 0.03 ^b 8584.84 +/- 641.32 ^a 4104.92 + 1490.06 ^a Rice flour: Oatmeal
(70:30) 18900.70 ± 762.20 ^b 0.48 ± 0.06 0.39 + 0.02 ^b 7307.19 + - 661.05 ^b 3510.30 ± 736.39 ^ab Rice flour: Oatmeal
(60:40) 17963.80 ± 805.52 ^b 0.421 ± 0.08 0.35 0.04 ^c 6282.96 + - 864.42 ^c 2688.70 ± 788.92 ^b

^{1) The} different alphabets located in the same column indicate a significant difference between each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

<Experimental Example 5> Analysis of Beta Glucan and Total Starch Contents of Broccoli by Oat Mixing Ratio

The content of beta - glucan and total starch in the broiler was analyzed by oat mixing ratio.

Specifically, the content of beta-glucan was measured using a Megazyme kit (K-BGLU) in the same manner as in Example 4, and the total starch content was measured using a Megazyme kit (K-TSTA ).

As shown in Table 14, the betaglucan content before and after the addition of oats was found to increase with increasing oat mixing ratio. The content of betaglucan before rice flour was increased, (Table 14).

Therefore, it was concluded that 40% of the optimum mixing ratio of cereal flour and oat flour is appropriate in terms of the content of betaclucan, which is the selection criterion of the infusion mix.

Percent Mix Mix Ratio (%) Beta Glucan (g / 100 g) Rice oats Oat Flour: Oats (100: 0) 0.23 ± 0.08 ^{c1 )} 0.23 0.08 ^c Flour: Oat (90:10) 0.33 0.02 ^c 0.43 + 0.02 ^ac Flour: Oat (80:10) 0.60 ± 0.01 ^b 0.76 ± 0.20 ^b Flour: Oats (70:30) 0.72 ± 0.00 ^b 0.78 + - 0.23 ^b Flour: Oat (60:40) 1.46 + 0.10 ^a 1.47 ± 0.06 ^a Rice Flour: Oats (100: 0) 0.48 ± 0.12 ^c 0.48 ± 0.12 ^c Rice flour: Oat (90:10) 0.57 ± 0.10 ^bc 0.53 + - 0.01 ^c Rice flour: oats (80:10) 0.68 ± 0.03 ^b 0.60 ± 0.03 ^bc Rice flour: Oats (70:30) 0.70 + 0.02 ^b 0.70 + - 0.05 ^b Rice flour: Oat (60:40) 0.99 ± 0.01 ^a 1.01 0.03 ^a

^{1) The} different alphabets located in the same column indicate a significant difference between each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

As shown in Table 15 below, the total amount of starch before the addition of the oat flour was lower than that before the rice flour. As shown in Table 15, the content of TS was lower than that before the rice flour, (Table 15).

Percent Mix Mix Ratio (%) Total starch (g / 100 g, D.W) Rice oats Oat Flour: Oats (100: 0) 71.31 + 1.33 ^{a1 )} 71.31 + 1.33 ^a Flour: Oat (90:10) 67.20 ± 1.26 ^ab 66.29 ± 2.45 ^b Flour: Oat (80:10) 63.28 ± 2.18 ^bc 62.42 + 1.31 ^bc Flour: Oats (70:30) 61.64 + - 2.55 ^c 61.16 ± 1.72 ^c Flour: Oat (60:40) 59.02 + - 2.60 ^c 60.06 + 1.49 ^c Rice Flour: Oats (100: 0) 77.57 ± 1.20 ^a 77.57 ± 1.20 ^a Rice flour: Oat (90:10) 73.67 ± 1.13 ^ab 71.78 ± 4.49 ^ab Rice flour: oats (80:10) 72.20 ± 3.57 ^ab 69.65 ± 1.65 ^ab Rice flour: Oats (70:30) 65.54 + 4.78 ^bc 69.33 ± 3.19 ^b Rice flour: Oat (60:40) 62.01 + - 3.44 ^c 66.77 ± 3.30 ^b

^{1) The} different alphabets located in the same column indicate a significant difference between each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

EXPERIMENTAL EXAMPLE 6 Analysis of Gelatinization Characteristic of Broccoli by Oat Mixing Ratio

This study was carried out to analyze the gelatinization characteristics of broiler by oat mixing ratio.

Specifically, the experimental method was performed in the same manner as in Example 6.

As a result, as shown in Table 16, rice flour transition was higher than that of wheat flour in all of the highest, lowest, lowest, and final viscosity irrespective of the variety, and the lowering viscosity, final viscosity, The degree of discoloration was higher with the addition of oats than with rice flour, and there was no significant difference according to the initiation temperature (Table 14).

On the other hand, there was no significant difference in the onset temperature of oat flour according to the addition rate of oats, and that of rice flour increased with the addition of oats (Table 14). In addition, as in rice oats, the maximum viscosity, minimum viscosity, drop viscosity, and final viscosity before and after rice flour were inversely related to the addition of oats.

Oat varieties
Mixing ratio (%) Peak viscosity
(RVU) Trough
(RVU) Breakdown
(RVU) Final Viscosity
(RVU) Setback
(RVU) Peak Time
(min) Pasting Temp
(° C) Flour: Rice Oat
(100: 0) 152.63 + - 0.42 ^c1) 94.34 + - 0.47 ^c 58.30 ± 0.88 ^c 181.21 + - 2.18 ^b 86.88 ± 1.70 ^b 6.00 + - 0.10 65.15 + - 2.33 Flour: Rice Oat
(90:10) 170.09 ± 10.13 ^bc 100.96 ± 5.83 ^bc 69.13 + - 4.31 ^b 186.46 + - 11.84 ^b 85.50 ± 6.01 ^b 6.07 ± 0.10 71.08 + - 8.45 Flour: Rice Oat
(80:20) 181.58 ± 3.18 ^ab 106.34 ± 0.83 ^ab 75.25 ± 2.36 ^ab 197.75 ± 4.24 ^ab 91.42 ± 3.42 ^b 6.04 ± 0.05 65.60 0.49 Flour: Rice Oat
(70:30) 182.00 ± 10.14 ^ab 106.50 ± 6.83 ^ab 75.50 ± 3.30 ^ab 199.63 ± 8.90 ^ab 93.13 ± 2.06 ^ab 6.04 ± 0.05 67.23 + -0.53 Flour: Rice Oat
(60:40) 193.50 ± 4.48 ^a 114.63 ± 1.70 ^a 78.88 +/- 2.76 ^a 216.46 ± 5.13 ^a 101.84 ± 3.42 ^a 6.07 ± 0.00 71.88 + - 6.26 Rice Flour: Rice Oat
(100: 0) 301.42 ± 2.00 ^a 163.92 + 0.71 ^a 137.50 ± 2.72 ^a 304.42 ± 0.59 ^a 140.50 ± 1.30 ^a 6.07 ± 0.00 ^c 64.80 ± 0.57 Rice Flour: Rice Oat
(90:10) 250.88 + - 3.12 ^b 153.17 ± 0.71 ^ab 97.71 + - 2.42 ^b 284.42 ± 3.77 ^b 131.25 ± 3.07 ^ab 6.20 ± 0.00 ^b 64.38 ± 1.10 Rice Flour: Rice Oat
(80:20) 228.46 ± 9.49 ^c 138.25 + - 5.42 ^bc 90.21 ± 4.07 ^bc 269.50 ± 5.77 ^bc 131.25 ± 0.35 ^ab 6.24 ± 0.05 ^ab 64.78 ± 2.93 Rice Flour: Rice Oat
(70:30) 217.46 ± 0.41 ^c 138.63 + - 8.66 ^bc 78.84 +/- 8.25 ^cd 262.75 ± 1.77 ^c 124.13 + - 6.89 ^b 6.30 ± 0.04 ^a 67.53 + 0.04 Rice Flour: Rice Oat
(60:40) 210.50 ± 14.50 ^c 135.21 + - 8.31 ^c 75.30 ± 6.19 ^d 260.00 ± 11.91 ^c 124.79 + - 3.59 ^b 6.27 ± 0.00 ^ab 65.63 + - 1.66 Rice oats 100 301.42 ± 2.00 163.92 + 0.71 137.50 ± 2.72 304.42 ± 0.59 140.50 ± 1.30 6.07 ± 0.00 64.80 ± 0.57 Flour: Oatmeal (100: 0) 152.63 + - 0.42 ^c 94.34 ± 0.47 ^d 58.30 ± 0.88 ^c 181.21 ± 2.18 ^e 86.88 ± 1.70 ^e 6.00 + - 0.01 65.15 + - 2.33 Wheat flour: oat
(90:10) 172.33 ± 2.40 ^b 103.86 ± 0.49 ^c 68.47 ± 2.46 ^b 208.44 ± 1.72 ^d 104.58 ± 1.34 ^d 6.02 + 0.04 65.88 + - 0.80 Wheat flour: oat
(80:20) 180.69 + 1.52 ^a 107.53 + - 1.33 ^b 73.17 + 0.22 ^a 228.22 + - 3.34 ^c 120.69 + 2.02 ^c 6.02 ± 0.08 65.97 + - 3.73 Wheat flour: oat
(70:30) 183.64 ± 0.77 ^a 109.83 ± 2.22 ^ab 73.81 ± 2.07 ^a 248.61 ± 3.71 ^b 138.78 ± 1.52 ^b 6.00 ± 0.00 65.72 ± 1.92 Wheat flour: oat
(60:40) 183.11 + - 4.52 ^a 112.28 +/- 2.59 ^a 70.83 ± 3.00 ^ab 272.72 ± 5.76 ^a 160.45 ± 3.17 ^a 6.07 ± 0.00 70.48 8.34 Rice flour: Oatmeal (100: 0) 301.42 ± 2.00 ^a 163.92 + 0.71 ^a 137.50 ± 2.72 ^a 304.42 ± 0.59 ^a 140.50 ± 1.30 ^e 6.07 ± 0.00 ^b 64.80 ± 0.57 ^b Rice flour: Oatmeal
(90:10) 231.72 + - 4.15 ^b 134.00 ± 2.57 ^b 97.72 ± 2.11 ^b 289.00 ± 3.23 ^b 155.00 ± 1.23 ^d 6.33 ± 0.00 ^a 66.28 0.94 ^b Rice flour: Oatmeal
(80:20) 222.89 ± 1.62 ^b 131.72 ± 2.96 ^bc 91.17 ± 1.55 ^c 299.39 ± 5.67 ^ab 167.67 ± 3.19 ^c 6.38 ± 0.08 ^a 65.75 ± 1.24 ^ab Rice flour: Oatmeal
(70:30) 209.34 + - 10.68 ^c 123.06 ± 9.71 ^c 86.28 ± 0.98 ^d 300.42 ± 14.91 ^ab 177.36 ± 5.23 ^b 6.35 + 0.04 ^a 67.07 ± 2.31 ^ab Rice flour: Oatmeal
(60:40) 201.84 ± 3.92 ^c 123.25 + 2.36 ^c 78.58 ± 2.40 ^e 310.97 ± 2.95 ^a 187.72 ± 0.61 ^a 6.31 ± 0.03 ^a 67.97 ± 0.92 ^a Oatmeal 100 195.03 ± 1.60 134.44 + 3.69 60.58 + - 2.80 420.36 + - 6.42 285.92 + - 3.46 6.11 + 0.03 70.17 + - 6.58

^{1) The} different alphabets located in the same column indicate a significant difference between each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

<Experimental Example 7> Starch digestibility and eGI analysis of the beef broiler according to oat mixing ratio

The starch digestibility and eGI of corn flour were analyzed by oat flour mixing ratio.

A specific experimental method was carried out in the same manner as in <Example 7>.

As shown in Table 17, RDS and SDS of the oats of rice were 1.22 ~ 5.88% and 19.89 ~ 32.46%, respectively, but there was no significant difference according to the mixing ratio of oats, (Table 17).

In addition, the RS of crust increased with the addition of oats to both wheat flour and rice flour. RDS and SDS showed different contents of wheat flour before rice flour and before rice flour, respectively. That is, RDS and SDS before wheat flour decreased and increased with increasing oat addition ratio, respectively, whereas RDS and SDS before rice flour increased and decreased, respectively.

It was also confirmed that the SDS values of the wheat and rice flour substitutes were comparable to those of the wheat flour and rice flour base at the 40% oat mixture ratio.

Mixing ratio (%) RDS ^{1 )} SDS ^{2 )} RS ³⁾ Rice oats Oat Rice oats Oat Rice oats Oat Flour: Oat
(100: 0) 5.88 ± 1.66 ^a4) 5.88 ± 1.66 ^b 32.46 ± 1.33 ^a 32.46 ± 1.33 ^a 61.66 ± 0.33 ^d 61.66 ± 0.33 ^b Flour: Oat
(90:10) 3.00
± 1.76 ^ab 16.19 ± 1.07 ^a 22.46 ± 2.12 ^cd 19.36 ± 1.25 ^b 74.54 ± 0.35 ^ab 64.45 ± 2.33 ^b Flour: Oat
(80:20) 1.46
± 0.19 ^b 4.57 ± 1.14 ^b 27.44 ± 0.56 ^b 31.98 + 0.38 ^a 71.11 + - 0.75 ^c 63.46 ± 0.76 ^b Flour: Oat
(70:30) 1.22
± 0.96 ^b 5.90 ± 0.97 ^b 25.03 ± 1.15 ^bc 29.35 + 1.55 ^a 73.74 ± 0.19 ^b 64.76 ± 0.58 ^b Flour: Oat
(60:40) 4.55 ± 1.61 ^ab 1.26 + - 0.20 ^c 19.89 ± 1.21 ^d 29.46 + 2.57 ^a 75.56 + 0.40 ^a 69.28 ± 2.37 ^a Rice Flour: Oat
(100: 0) 1.62
± 0.46 ^b 1.62 ± 0.46 ^d 36.97 + - 0.61 36.97 ± 0.61 ^a 61.40 ± 0.15 ^b 61.40 ± 0.15 ^c Rice Flour: Oat
(90:10) 2.05 ± 2.25 ^ab 5.49 ± 0.50 ^c 35.63 ± 0.80 31.20 ± 0.50 ^b 62.32 + 1.45 ^b 63.31 ± 0.99 ^bc Rice Flour: Oat
(80:20) 7.20
± 2.96 ^a 6.50 ± 0.68 ^c 29.15 + - 4.76 26.25 + 1.70 ^c 63.65 ± 1.81 ^ab 67.25 + 1.02 ^a Rice Flour: Oat
(70:30) 6.78 ± 2.35 ^ab 8.59 ± 0.51 ^b 30.45 ± 3.26 25.52 + - 2.57 ^c 62.77 ± 0.90 ^ab 65.89 ± 2.05 ^ab Rice Flour: Oat
(60:40) 3.65 ± 1.34 ^ab 10.43 ± 0.89 ^a 29.75 ± 3.44 21.10 ± 0.00 ^d 66.59 ± 2.10 ^a 68.47 ± 0.89 ^a

¹⁾ Rapid digestible starch (RDS) is rapidly digested starch; ²⁾ SDS (slowly digestible starch) is slowly digested starch; and ³⁾ RS (resistant starch) is non-digestible starch.

^{4) The} different alphabets in the same column mean a significant difference from each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

As shown in the following Table 18, the starch digestibility (eGI) tended to decrease with increasing oat addition rate regardless of the type of the starch, and it was considered that the starch digestibility (eGI) was correlated with the content of betaglucan in oats. Also, the flour transfer showed a somewhat lower eGI value compared to before rice flour (Table 18).

Mixing ratio (%) ego Rice oats Oat Flour: Oats (100: 0) 62.49 + 0.09 ^{a1 )} 62.49 + 0.18 ^a Flour: Oat (90:10) 55.95 ± 0.05 ^b 61.53 ± 0.10 ^ab Flour: Oat (80:20) 54.99 ± 0.54 ^bc 61.06 + - 0.62 ^b Flour: Oats (70:30) 53.70 + - 0.14 ^c 59.86 +/- 0.72 ^c Flour: Oat (60:40) 53.67 + - 0.13 ^c 56.68 + - 0.01 ^d Rice Flour: Oats (100: 0) 62.11 + 0.01 ^a 62.11 + - 0.46 ^a Rice flour: Oat (90:10) 60.97 + - 0.30 ^b 59.43 ± 0.48 ^b Rice flour: oats (80:20) 60.81 ± 0.69 ^bc 59.22 + 0.09 ^b Rice flour: Oats (70:30) 59.85 ± 0.50 ^cd 59.07 ± 0.31 ^bc Rice flour: Oat (60:40) 59.20 ± 0.26 ^d 58.33 ± 0.09 ^c

^{1) The} different alphabets located in the same column indicate a significant difference between each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

The eGI value for the grain selection of cereal added oat flour mix was lower than that of rice oat flour mix for wheat flour base and for oat flour mix for rice flour base. Therefore, it is effective to develop functional impregnated mix with low blood glucose index (GI) by using rice oat for flour base and rice oat for rice flour base when trying to select the proper grain of grain added oat flour mixture.

<Experimental Example 8> Examination of the preference degree of the broiler according to the mixing ratio of oats

Finally, preference for appearance, flavor, and taste of broiler was investigated by oat mixing ratio.

Specifically, 15 women aged 25 to 37 who worked at the Rural Development Administration conducted the sensory evaluation after explaining the purpose and evaluation items of the experiment. Each sample was cut at a constant size and placed on the same white plate at the same time after 10 minutes of being made, and was presented with purified water so that the mouth could be rinsed between evaluations. The evaluation items were evaluated on a 9 point scale for color, flavor, taste, texture, and overall preperence.

As a result, as shown in Table 19, the appearance, flavor and overall acceptability were higher than before the control flour and rice flour regardless of the oat varieties, and the sensory evaluation before rice oats was favorable for the appearance, flavor and taste, There was no significant difference between the two groups (Table 19).

On the other hand, the addition of oats to the crust of oat increased the pre - flour flavor and appearance before rice flour, and it was found that the degree of preference increased slightly with the addition of oats.

Therefore, the treatments which showed better overall acceptability by adding oats to grain flour were 40% and 40%, respectively, compared with rice flour.

Therefore, the optimum mixing ratio of oat - added mix was 40%, which was high, and the same tendency also appeared in rice flour.

kind Mixing ratio (%) Appearance Flavor Taste Texture Overall preference Rice oats Flour: Oats (100: 0) 4.73
± 2.19 4.60
± 1.24 4.20 ± 1.37 ^b1) 5.47
± 1.73 4.33
± 1.50 ^b Flour: Oat
(90:10) 5.80
± 1.61 5.00
± 1.77 5.20
± 1.37 ^ab 5.40
± 1.96 5.27
± 1.22 ^ab Flour: Oat
(80:20) 5.33
± 1.63 4.33
± 1.63 5.00
± 1.00 ^ab 5.27
± 1.71 5.07
± 1.44 ^ab Flour: Oat
(70:30) 5.87
± 1.92 4.33
± 2.02 4.87
± 1.96 ^ab 5.53
± 2.07 5.40
± 1.80 ^ab Flour: Oat
(60:40) 5.27
± 1.44 4.00
± 2.07 5.60
± 1.72 ^a 5.60
± 1.59 5.60
± 1.64 ^a Rice Flour: Oats (100: 0) 3.40
± 1.64 ^c 4.80
± 1.82 4.20
± 1.52 4.47
± 1.88 ^b 3.80
± 1.15 ^b Rice Flour: Oat
(90:10) 4.67
± 1.76 ^b 4.93
± 1.53 4.87
± 1.19 5.73
± 1.49 ^a 5.07
± 1.39 ^a Rice Flour: Oat
(80:20) 5.73
± 1.91 ^ab 5.47
± 1.19 5.20
± 1.01 5.87
± 1.30 ^a 5.80
± 1.21 ^a Rice Flour: Oat
(70:30) 6.27
± 1.33 ^a 5.60
± 1.59 5.27
± 1.49 5.93
± 1.28 ^a 5.80
± 1.52 ^a Rice Flour: Oat
(60:40) 5.53
± 1.55 ^ab 4.93
± 2.09 5.33
± 2.02 6.27
± 1.58 ^a 5.47
± 1.96 ^a Oat Flour: Oats (100: 0) 4.67
± 1.59 4.33
± 1.23 ^b 4.13
± 1.25 5.53
± 1.41 4.60
± 1.59 Flour: Oat
(90:10) 4.93
± 1.67 4.67
± 1.35 ^b 4.80
± 1.70 5.27
± 1.62 5.27
± 1.22 Flour: Oat
(80:20) 5.07
± 1.79 5.07
± 1.67 ^ab 5.27
± 1.49 5.73
± 1.39 5.27
± 1.58 Flour: Oat
(70:30) 5.80
± 1.90 4.80
± 1.78 ^ab 4.73
± 1.53 5.13
± 1.64 5.40
± 1.59 Flour: Oat
(60:40) 5.80
± 1.57 6.00
± 1.93 ^a 5.20
± 1.47 5.40
± 1.40 5.40
± 1.59 Rice Flour: Oats (100: 0) 3.80
± 1.86 ^c 4.80
± 1.90 4.00
± 1.31 ^b 4.60
± 1.76 4.07
± 1.33 ^b Rice Flour: Oat
(90:10) 4.40
± 1.64 ^bc 4.67
± 1.63 4.73
± 1.28 ^ab 5.47
± 1.46 5.13
± 1.68 ^ab Rice Flour: Oat
(80:20) 5.33
± 1.76 ^ab 5.40
± 1.40 5.47
± 1.51 ^a 5.60
± 1.72 5.33
± 1.95 ^ab Rice Flour: Oat
(70:30) 5.93
± 1.62 ^a 5.07
± 1.44 4.60
± 1.80 ^ab 4.40
± 1.84 4.80
± 1.52 ^ab Rice Flour: Oat
(60:40) 6.20
± 1.70 ^a 5.20
± 1.66 5.47
± 1.25 ^a 4.67
± 1.50 5.47
± 1.46 ^a

^{1) The} different alphabets located in the same column indicate a significant difference between each other at Duncan's multiple range test at p <0.05.

Claims (5)

A method for producing an infusion mix wherein the content of betaglucan prepared by mixing rice flour or wheat into oats of 50 to 70 mesh or oats of 90 to 110 mesh is enhanced,
Wherein the mixing is carried out in an amount of 10 to 40% by weight of oats.
The method of claim 1, wherein the infusion mix has a low glycemic index (GI) or a low starch digestibility.
[Claim 2] The method of claim 1, wherein the infusion mix is prepared by mixing rice oats with wheat flour and oats with rice flour.
6. An oatmeal mix according to claim 1, wherein the content of betaglucan is increased.
Crumbling with 50 to 70 mesh of oat or 90 to 110 mesh of rice oats.

Images