Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39856899›Full record

ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Interaction Effects of Tannic Acid and Gluten on Bread-Making and Its Starch Digestion.

Seonghyeon Nam, Oguz K Ozturk, Jongbin Lim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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. Article
  3. Application of Honey fromPreventive nutrition and food science · 2025
    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.

Seonghyeon NamDepartment of Food Bioengineering, Jeju National University, Jeju 63243, Republic of Korea.
Oguz K OzturkDepartment of Food Science and Human Nutrition, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2046-7305
Jongbin LimDepartment of Food Bioengineering, Jeju National University, Jeju 63243, Republic of Korea.

Funding

Korea Institute for Advancement of Technology P0024160Korea Institute for Advancement of Technology P0025912National Research Foundation of Korea 2019R1A6A1A10072987
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, we explored the binding mechanism between tannic acid (TA) and gluten to apply TA as an ingredient in bread-making to evaluate its baking performance and starch digestion. The interaction was systematically investigated by analyzing binding affinity, binding mode, and matrix structure of the TA-gluten complex using fluorescence quenching, molecular docking, and confocal laser scanning microscopy. TA strongly interacted with gluten via non-covalent interactions, mainly hydrogen bonds, and formed the major hydrogen bonds with six different glutamines (Q32, Q108, Q313, Q317, Q317, and Q349), which play a critical role in gluten network construction among amino acid residues of gluten. Additionally, TA showed lower binding affinity toward glutenin (-10.4 kcal/mol) compared to gliadin (-8.9 kcal/mol), implying stronger binding with glutenin. Consequently, the interaction between TA and gluten created a dense and compact gluten network structure. It influenced baking performance, causing a decrease in bread loaf volume while an increase in firmness and lowering the starch digestion rate, increasing slowly digestible starch and resistant starch fractions. This study identified the binding mechanism of TA toward gluten and provides better insights into how to apply TA or perhaps other polyphenols to design functional bakery products to control starch digestion rate.

Indexed as

baking performancegluten networkstarch digestiontannic acid

Identifiers

PMID39856899
PMCPMC11765497

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.