Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36832848›Full record

ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Evaluation of Processing Conditions and Hydrocolloid Addition on Functional Properties of Aquafaba.

Kaelyn Crawford, Catrin Tyl, William Kerr

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The development of a silage-based biorefinery to deliver the maximum nutritional benefit for human consumption from UK grasslands.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Kaelyn CrawfordDepartment of Food Science and Technology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA.
Catrin TylFaculty of Chemistry, Biotechnology and Food Science, Norwegian University of Life Science, 1432 Ås, Norway.ORCID 0000-0003-4470-2859
William KerrDepartment of Food Science and Technology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aquafaba, the cooking water from chickpeas, could replace animal-derived ingredients such as egg whites in systems that require the stabilization of an oil or gas phase. However, little is known about how processing methods and additives affect its functional properties. In this study, aquafaba was prepared via boiling or pressure-cooking at water-to-seed (WSR) ratios of 5:1, 4:1 and 3:1. The effects of preparation method and pH adjustment on viscosity, protein content, solubility and profile were evaluated. Samples were further analyzed for foaming capacity/stability (FC/FS) and emulsifying activity/stability index (EAI/ESI). Foams were also prepared in combination with xanthan gum or hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC). Solubility was lowest near pH 4 and not affected by cooking method and protein profile was not affected by method or ratio. Samples with pH 3 had high EAI and FS, but low ESI and FC. WSR did not significantly affect interfacial properties. Xanthan gum had a greater effect than HPMC on viscosity and prevented foam liquid drainage for 24 h. While the preparation method affects aquafaba properties, subsequent pH adjustment is of greater relevance for interfacial properties. Foam volumes can be maximized and foam drainage limited by appropriate choice of hydrocolloids and addition levels.

Indexed as

aquafabafoamsfood processingphysical properties

Identifiers

PMID36832848
PMCPMC9956225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.