ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Dough Functional Properties and Bread Quality of Stone-Milled Refined Flours in Comparison to Traditional HRS Wheat Flours.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While traditional flours, such as roller-milled refined flour (RRF) and stone-milled whole-wheat flour (SWF), are subject to a trade-off between nutritional value and sensory quality, stone-milled refined flour (SRF) offers a balanced composition. Nevertheless, the functionality and baking performance of dough depend on complex macromolecular interactions beyond composition alone. Using three hard red spring (HRS) wheat varieties, this study compares the protein and starch functionality, dough rheology, and bread quality associated with SRF compared to RRF, SWF, and roller-milled whole-wheat flour (RWF). Stronger gluten formation in SRF compared to RRF was evident from its higher maximum torque (62.83 GPU) and gluten aggregation energy (1681.7 GPU) in the Glutopeak analysis. Using a Rapid Visco Analyser (RVA), lower peak viscosity (1725.25 RVU) and higher pasting temperature (89.4 °C) were observed for SRF. It also exhibited higher water absorption (68.93%) than RRF (65.98%), although their dough stability and mixing tolerance were similar. While RRF produced the highest specific bread volume (6.74 cc/g) and softest crumb (2147.13 mN), SRF achieved an intermediate volume (5.51 cc/g) with a 26.4% improvement over SWF. The correlation analysis results indicated that specific volume is positively associated with gluten aggregation parameters and negatively correlated with crumb firmness, confirming that bread quality is primarily governed by gluten structure. Overall, the use of SRF resulted in balanced dough properties and bread quality, making it a viable, nutritionally enriched alternative for both artisanal and commercial baking.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.