Abstract
Starch, which is conventionally processed by heat, is a key food component and an industrial raw material. High hydrostatic pressure (HHP) can induce gelatinization of starch without heating. Spontaneous retrogradation can be observed immediately after HHP-induced gelatinization, depending on the starch content and temperature. In HHP treatment of starch systems, it should be differentiated whether it is anisotropic or isotropic compression, each of which results in different properties of the obtained starches. Physicochemical changes of various starches due to thermal or HHP treatment have been studied intensively by various methods, and the behavior of starch gelatinization under combinations of heat and HHP has been systematically revealed in recent years. In this paper, trends in the study of HHP-treated starch are reviewed from the viewpoints of fundamental and application approaches.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
1 Introduction
1.1 Starch and Gelatinization
Starch is a granular storage material found in terrestrial plants abundantly and universally, and it is also important for humans as a key food component (Zobel 1984). When heated in the presence of water, the intermolecular bonds of starch molecules are broken down, allowing hydrogen bonding sites (hydroxyl hydrogen and oxygen) to bind with water. Disruption of this structure is usually referred to as heat gelatinization or, simply and conventionally, gelatinization, which is essential in all kinds of industrial and culinary utilization of starch. It is characterized by a loss in crystallinity and birefringence, solubilization of amylose, and irreversible swelling of the granules (Waigh et al. 2000). Thus, starch is utilized as a texture modifier in the food industry and as an adhesive agent in other industries.
Starch is primarily composed of amylose and amylopectin , which are homoglycans comprised only of α-d-glucose. Amylose is an α-1,4-linked linear glucose polymer , and amylopectin is an α-1,6-branched tuft of α-1,4-linked linear glucose oligomers (branched chains) and/or polymers. The chemical structures of amylose and amylopectin depend on the botanical origin of starch and other environmental factors during plant growth. Starch granules appear in different shapes depending on its botanical origin. In general, each of starch granules has a porous core called “hilum ,” which is the ignition point of growth rings, i.e., alternate concentric ellipsoidal lamellar structure. It is speculated that some pores exist on the granular surface, and these pores are connected to the hilum through channels. The crystalline layers of the granule consist of ordered regions composed of double helices formed by the short chains of amylopectin, most of which are further ordered into crystalline structures known as crystalline lamellae . Amorphous regions of the semicrystalline layers and amorphous layers are composed of amylose and non-ordered amylopectin branches (Waigh et al. 1997). Glucose monomers in amylopectin are oriented radially in the starch granule, with the nonreducing ends of the chains toward the granule surface. As the radius increases, so does the number of branches required to fill the space, with the consequent formation of concentric regions of alternating amorphous and crystalline structure.
Physicochemical properties of starch are strongly affected by the length and number of amylose molecules and/or amylopectin branched chains. Starch with deficiency of amylose may form sticky gels, being referred to as waxy starch. It is currently understood that two branched chains of amylopectin form a double strand, and the double strands further form tufts comprising microcrystalline domains. Wide-angle X-ray diffractometry classifies these diffraction patterns into three categories. Type A is often observed in cereal starch such as maize, wheat, and rice (Hizukuri et al. 1983; Parker and Ring 2001). Type B is typical for high-amylose (>50 %) cereal starches and for tuber starches such as potato, lily, tulip, lotus, and canna (Hizukuri et al. 1983; Parker and Ring 2001). Type C represents intermediate superimposed patterns of types A and B and can be found in tropical plants and legume starches such as peas and beans (Sugimoto and Watsuji 2006) and chestnuts (Iwaki and Sugimoto 2004). Diffraction patterns have not yet been revealed based on currently available information on the chemical structure of amylopectin, although information on these patterns has been intensively accumulated (Hizukuri 1985; Jane et al. 2003; Seetharaman and Bertoft 2013). Although some models have been suggested, there is no conclusive three-dimensional structure model for starch granules (Pérez et al. 2009).
1.2 Pressure-Induced Gelatinization
The effect of HPP on starch gelatinization has recently been studied intensively. Although the mechanism of HPP-induced gelatinization is likely to be different from heat gelatinization, both temperature and pressure are, as in the case of protein denaturation, crucial parameters when changes in starch structures are intended to be brought about in food processing (Knorr et al. 2006).
Starch can change into gel or paste irreversibly due to order–disorder transition when heated in the presence of water. During heat gelatinization , starch granules absorb water and swell, and the growth rings and crystalline features are lost (Fig. 20.1). For a complete hydration and gelatinization of (potato) starch, more than 14 water molecules per one glucose unit are required (Donovan 1979). When gelatinized starch is stored, for instance, in a refrigerator, new starch crystals are formed and its texture becomes stiff. This hardening phenomenon is referred to as retrogradation (Hoover 1995). Heat-gelatinized starch shows increased enzymatic susceptibility and, thus, high degradability by amylases, while retrograded heat-gelatinized starch becomes resistant to amylase digestion.
On the other hand, starch gel or paste can be obtained when a mixture of starch and water is treated with HHP. This phenomenon is referred to as pressure gelatinization. In pressure gelatinization, starch granules can swell while often maintaining their granular shape and lamellar structure (Fig. 20.2) (Stute et al. 1996; Stolt et al. 2001; Fukami et al. 2010). Knorr et al. (2006) suggested that under pressure the disintegration of the macromolecule is incomplete, since the pressure stabilization of hydrogen bonds favors the helix conformation (Fig. 20.3). Crystalline conversion from A to B isomorph under pressure has also been reported (Katopo et al. 2002).
1.3 Anisotropic Versus Isotropic Compressions of Starch
In HHP treatment of relatively dry starch samples in powder form, special attention should be paid to the mode of compression, either isotropic or anisotropic. In the case where starch granules are suspended in a liquid pressure medium such as water in a pouch, external pressure compresses the pouch and pressure is transmitted isotropically to individual starch granules through the medium (Fig. 20.4a). On the other hand, in the case where starch granules without a medium are put in a cylinder and directly and one dimensionally compressed by a piston, the granules are compressed anisotropically until the granules are distorted and completely packed (Fig. 20.4b).
In early studies on HHP treatment of starch, there was no viewpoint to utilize HHP actively for gelatinization: neither the utilization of HHP-treated starch as a novel food ingredient in food industry nor the study of pressure gelatinization behavior in HHP-treated starchy foods was the focus of such studies. In fact, the objective in these early studies was to study the effect of pressure on the mechanical damages of starch in the milling process. For instance, in ball milling of starch, anisotropic high pressure can be generated when heavy balls impact the starch granules on the inner surface of the rotating vessel (Brown and Heron 1879).
One of the oldest descriptions of HHP treatment of starch could be the following: Stärke, bei 20,000 atm. einem gleitenden Druck ausgesetzt, verliert ihr Röntgenogramm (Starch exposed to a sliding pressure of 20,000 atm loses its X-ray diffractogram) (Meyer et al. 1929). Although no detailed experimental procedure including the origin of starch was described in this literature, it is probable that the starch was subjected to pressure anisotropically under a sliding condition. Mercier et al. (1968) compressed several moistened starches anisotropically at 588.4 MPa by using a piston and investigated the microscopic morphology, X-ray diffraction, iodine-binding c apacity, water solubility, ethanol solubility, solubilized glucose, and enzymatic degradations by α- and β-amylases. Due to anisotropic compression, compressed starch granules under a microscope appeared as flat ellipsoids which were observed in milling as well (Jones 1940). It is a matter of interest that this compression trial aimed to improve starch availability by damaging native starches. After direct compression at 0.8–1.2 GPa, air- or oven-dried starches (Kudta and Tomasik 1992), and dry and wet starches in the presence of metal salts (Kudla and Tomasik 1992) were analyzed by methods including differential thermal analysis . Liu et al. (2008) carried out direct compression on several starches (approximately 14 % moisture) at up to 1500 MPa for 24 h. Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC ) and scanning electron microscopy indicated that gelatinization temperature and enthalpy change were slightly lowered and starch granule shape and surface appearance were changed after the high pressure treatment. However, X-ray diffraction patterns and birefringence of HHP starches were not changed.
Another method of compression is high pressure extrusion (Kim and Hamdy 1987). Starch colloidal solutions (0.5–2.5 % w/v) were extruded via an orifice of a French pressure cell while maintaining high hydraulic pressure at 90, 138, or 276 MPa. A combination of high pressure homogenization (22.0 MPa, 67.5 °C for 11 min) and spray drying results in a starch product that is similar in terms of morphology but less enzymatically digestible than that produced by a combination of heat gelatinization (5 % w/w starch–water suspension, gelatinized at 121 °C for 20 min) and spray drying (Le Thanh-Blicharz et al. 2012).
Recently, HHP treatment of starch h as principally been carried out in isotropic ways. In many cases, starch gelatinization is studied in the presence of water, and a starch–water mixture is transferred into a pouch which is placed in an HHP cylinder filled with pressure medium enabling isotropic compression (Fig. 20.5).
1.4 Characteristics of Pressure-Gelatinized Starch
Early studies reported an increase in the gelatinization temperature of a dilute suspension of potato starch (0.4 %) after HHP treatment at up to 253.3 MPa for 4 min (Thevelein et al. 1981). In contrast, Muhr and Blanshard (1982) reported that HHP treatment (200–1500 MPa) decreased gelatinization temperature. High pressure differential thermal analysis was carried out for further investigation on wheat, potato, and pea starches, indicating that starch gelatinization temperature first increases by a few degrees and decreases when pressure exceeds 150–250 MPa (Muhr et al. 1982).
Since HHP was suggested as a means of food processing in Japan (Hayashi 1987), pressure gelatinization has been studied intensively. It was reported that potato starch was more pressure resistant than wheat and maize starches (Hayashi and Hayashida 1989). Thereafter, pressure resistance was discussed in terms of starch crystalline types (Ezaki and Hayashi 1992): B-type starches such as potato and lily starches were more resistant to pressure than A-type starches such as maize starch, while C-type starches such as sweet potato starch had intermediate pressure resistance between A- and B-type starches. The effect of pressure holding time on gelatinization enthalpy change and gel properties was investigated using barley starch (Stolt et al. 2001). Retrogradation was observed immediately after HHP treatment of starch (Hibi et al. 1993; Stute et al. 1996; Katopo et al. 2002). Hu et al. (2011) compared the retrogradation behaviors between pressure- and heat-gelatinized rice starches, demonstrating that the retrogradation rate of pressure-gelatinized rice starch was slower than that of heat-gelatinized starch. Other studies indicated that pressure holding times bet ween 1 and 66 h did not affect enthalpy changes upon pressure gelatinization and melting of retrograded potato starch (Kawai et al. 2007a). HHP treatment induced swelling and gelatinization of starches but retained the granular shapes (Stute et al. 1996; Stolt et al. 2001).
Properties of HHP-treated starch are different from those of heat-treated starch. Amylose is released from heat-gelatinized starch but little from HHP-treated starch (Douzals et al. 1998; Oh et al. 2008b) or not at all (Stute et al. 1996). HHP treatment induces the swelling of starch granules while retaining their granular shapes (Stolt et al. 2001; Fukami et al. 2010). HHP treatment of barley starch and waxy maize starch showed that rheological properties, microstructure, birefringence, and enthalpy change upon gelatinization were dependent on holding time and holding pressure (Stolt et al. 1999, 2001; Buckow et al. 2007). However, further studies are necessary to clarify whether prolonged HHP treatment could complete the gelatinization of partially gelatinized starch treated at lower pressures. In addition, one report discussing the relationship between structure and pasting properties of HHP-treated (690 MPa) various starches having dif ferent chemical structures has been presented (Katopo et al. 2002).
1.5 Methods of Analysis for Pressure Gelatinization
When starch granules are observed under polarized light , raw starch granules show hilum-centered birefringence, which refracts light in an anisotropic material in two slightly different directions to form two rays and basically corresponds to crystallinity, while gelatinized granules lose the hilum and the birefringence (Zobel 1984). This method has been found to be suitable to detect very low degrees of pressure gelatinization and has been used by several authors (Thevelein et al. 1981; Muhr and Blanshard 1982; Stute et al. 1996; Douzals et al. 1998; Stolt et al. 2001; Bauer and Knorr 2004, 2005). The number of birefringent granules is counted and the gelatinization degree can be evaluated from the ratio of birefringent to total (birefringent and non-birefringent) granules. The quantitative performance of judging the degree of gelatinization by birefringence loss was calibrated with differential scanning calorimetry (DSC ) results, indicating that the method often slightly overestimates the gelatinized fraction in comparison with DSC measurements (Douzals et al. 2001). On the other hand, Bauer and Knorr (2004) showed that there was a good linear relationship between degree of gelatinization by birefringence loss and that by electrical conductivity.
DSC measurement is widely used for quantitative analysis of the degree of gelatinization. Depending on the botanical source of starch, an endothermic peak can be observed at around 60–80 °C in the presence of excess water, although the difference in thermal properties among starches of different botanical origins has not yet been clarified. The peak area is calculated as enthalpy change upon gelatinization (or simply gelatinization enthalpy: ΔH gel), which is used as an index of pressure gelatinization. ΔH gel assumes a maximum value when the starch is intact, and it becomes zero when completely gelatinized. Characteristic temperatures of the peak such as the onset temperature (T o), the peak top temperature (T p), and the conclusion temperature (T c) may vary after HHP treatment (Thevelein et al. 1981; Douzals et al. 2001; Kawai et al. 2007a).
Analysis of moist (10.0–34.0 %) barley starch samples by DSC under pressure (pressurized by nitrogen gas up to 2.5 MPa) showed that less water is required for initiation of gelatinization under the pressurized condition than under atmospheric pressure (Vainionpää et al. 1993). Recently, high sensitivity DSC was introduced to analyze dilute suspensions (0.5 %) of waxy wheat, waxy potato, waxy maize, and high amylose maize starches and mixtures of waxy and high-amylose maize starches after HHP treatment (Blaszczak 2007; Blaszczak et al. 2007a, b).
Pressure gelatinization can also be evaluated by X-ray diffractometry . When pressure-gelatinized, the intensities of the characteristic peaks on a broad halo in the diffractogram of the starch are reduced, indicating loss of crystallinity. Completely pressure-gelatinized starch shows only an amorphous halo (Hibi et al. 1993; Katopo et al. 2002; Blaszczak et al. 2005b). For a quantitative evaluation of pressure gelatinization, a crystallinity index can be used (Hibi et al. 1993). However, attention should be paid to evaluating pressure gelatinization and retrogradation of B-type starch (Stute et al. 1996), since the diffraction pattern of B-type crystallinity can be superimposed by that of retrograded starch in the pressure gelatinization. Therefore, X-ray diffraction should be used for evaluation of HHP-treated B-type starch in combination with other methods such as DSC.
Compressibility of HHP-treated starch was calculated by measuring volume changes (cross-sectional area of the pressure chamber multiplied by the plunged length of the piston) of 16 % w/w (dry matter basis) aqueous suspension of wheat starch and pure water under varying pressure conditions (Douzals et al. 1996a, b). During compression below 300 MPa, compressibility of starch suspension was close to that of pure water, while reduction of volume was higher for starch suspension at higher pressures due to starch gelatinization. Interestingly, compressibility of starch suspension was higher during decompression than during compression, and starch gels treated with HHP remained compressed after decompression. These results indicated that total volume was reduced due to starch melting and that water binding to starch under pressure is strong.
NMR analysis of HHP-treated starch has been performed using cross-polarization/magic angle spinning (CP/MAS) 13C NMR which is a powerful tool to analyze the structure of solid organic materials (Blaszczak et al. 2005a, b). HHP-treated potato starch presents two resonances (Blaszczak et al. 2005b), which are characteristic to amorphous starch (Gidley and Bociek 1985).
Snauwaert and Heremans (1999) monitored in situ the pressure gelatinization of potato starch by optical microscopy facilitated with a video camera in a diamond anvil cell (DAC ) . Once pressure gelatinization was initiated under pressure, swelling did not stop until the pressure was reduced to below the initiation pressure. From the swelling constant, the activation volume was calculated to be −18 cm3/mol, and elliptical starch granules appeared to have a much lower swelling threshold pressure than spherical ones. Swelling of wheat starch granules under HHPs of up to 300 MPa was also observed under an optical microscope by Bauer et al. (2004). Similarly, Buckow et al. (2007) observed in situ maize starch gelatinization in aqueous solution (5 % w/w) in a high pressure cell at HHPs of up to 650 MPa (Fig. 20.6).
Pressure gelatinization behaviors of rice, potato, maize, waxy maize, pea, and tapioca starches were studied in situ in a DAC by Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy (Rubens et al. 1999; Rubens and Heremans 2000). The characteristic absorptions observed with amorphous and crystalline features of the above-mentioned starches were specified, and the ratio of specific absorption intensities synergistically changed upon heating or pressurization. In addition, the changes upon heating and pressurization were not synergistic but monotonous in the cases of the aqueous suspensions of amylose, amylopectin, and their mixture (1:1), suggesting the importance of imperfect packings of amylose and amylopectin in starch granules (Rubens and Heremans 2000). The data on the pressure gelatinization by the in situ measurements was thermodynamically analyzed as in the case of other biopolymers (Smeller 2002).
As a novel technique, scanning transitiometry of starch–water emulsion is of great interest (Randzio and Orlowska 2005). Thermal and volumetric properties upon gelatinization of wheat starch were studied at a pressure range from 0.1 to 100 MPa and a temperature range from 10 to 157 °C (283 to 430 K).
1.6 Pressure Gelatinization and Enzymatic Digestibility
Amylase digestibility of starch increased after HHP treatments of starch–water mixture at 100–600 MPa and elevated temperatures (45 and 50 °C) (Hayashi and Hayashida 1989). This tendency was also observed with potato and wheat starches which were HHP-treated (0.1–650 MPa) at 10 °C and digested by α-amylase (Noguchi et al. 2003). HHP-gelatinized starch shows increased enzymatic susceptibility (digestibility) similar to heat-gelatinized starch (Hayashi and Hayashida 1989). Gomes et al. (1998) pressure-treated wheat or barley flour suspension at up to 800 MPa and evaluated the level of glucose produced by inherent α- and β-amylases during HHP treatment. The degree of gelatinization increased with increasing pressure. However, glucose productivity decreased as HHP was further raised due to the inactivation of the amylases. Bacillus amyloliquefaciens alpha-amylase (BAA) in a buffer solution with or without a substrate (soluble starch) was treated with HHPs of up to 400 MPa. The activation volumes for HHP inactivation of the enzyme were evaluated from the rates of hydrolysis as −13.8 ± 2.1 (with substrate) and −28.4 ± 2.2 cm3/mol (without substrate), respectively (Raabe and Knorr 1996). It was indicated that the pressure resistance of the enzyme could be increased in the presence of the substrate due to binding of the substrate to the enzyme. Furthermore, a retarded enzymatic hydrolysis of starch by BAA under pressures of up to 400 MPa at 25 °C was detected, indicating a reversible inhibition of the reaction but irreversible inactivation of the enzyme. Similarly, enhanced maize starch hydrolysis by glucoamylase from Aspergillus niger was found with increasing HHP (Buckow 2006), but pressures of up to 300 MPa can induce changes in product composition accompanying the hydrolysis of maltooligosaccharides by porcine pancreatic α-amylase (Matsumoto et al. 1997; Baks et al. 2008b). However, applying HHPs of up to 600 MPa at elevated temperatures (e.g., 60–80 °C) can significantly increase enzyme activity and starch digestibility (Heinz et al. 2005).
1.7 Roles of Water in Pressure Gelatinization
Water is indispensable for both heat gelatinization and pressure gelatinization. In heat gelatinization, 14 molecules of water per one glucose unit are required for complete hydration upon gelatinization (Donovan 1979). However, a systematic unde rstanding of the effect of water content on pressure gelatinization has not yet progressed sufficiently, as most studies on pressure gelatinization have been carried out under limited conditions in terms of water content.
HHP treatment of starch with low water content, i.e., dry or low moist starch, has been carried out by anisotropic compression in many reports. Enzymatic digestibility of potato, wheat, and maize starches at low water content (2–36 %) was measured after piston compression, and digestibility showed minimums for potato starch at a water content of about 19 % and for wheat and maize starches at about 14 %, respectively (Mercier et al. 1968). Reducibility of air- or oven-dried potato starch at a water content of 15.1 % increased after pelletization by plunger compression (Kudla and Tomasik 1992, 1992). The authors suggested that water might act as a Lewis base and hydrolyze the glucosidic bonds with the help of applied compression energy which was estimated to be in the order of energy of covalent bonds. In addition, depolymerization of starch was observed after high pressure extrusion (Kim and Hamdy 1987). On the contrary, several papers have reported that the chemical bonds of starch molecules were not influenced by HHP treatment (Hibi et al. 1993; Katopo et al. 2002).
At higher water content (≥70 %), a few phase tran sition diagrams (gelatinization vs. pressure vs. temperature) have been presented (Douzals et al. 2001; Knorr et al. 2006; Buckow et al. 2007, 2009) and an example of complete gelatinization of barley malt, wheat, tapioca, normal maize, and potato starch slurries (5 % w/w) after 15-min processing at isothermal/isobaric conditions can be seen in Fig. 20.7.
Pressure gelatinization and other related experiments were often carried out at a fixed water content. However, some studies have investigated pressure gelatinization of starch at several water contents (Yamamoto et al. 2009). Stute et al. (1996) reported that HHP gelatinization requires at least a water content of 50 % as evaluated in the DSC measurements of HHP-treated (600 MPa, 20 °C, 15 min) starch samples at water contents of 42 %, 56 %, and 71 %. Katopo et al. (2002) treated starches of various botanical origins at water contents of 50 % and 67 % at 690 MPa and room temperature for 5 min and concluded that the degree of g elatinization was higher in starches at 67 % than in those at only 50 %. As indicated above, pressure gelatinization has been studied at limited water contents, and, therefore, a systematic understanding on the role of water in pressure gelatinization of various starches is not yet possible.
1.8 Effect of Water Content on Pressure Gelatinization
Potato starch has been reported to be more pressure resistant than cereal starches such as maize, wheat, and rice starches (Muhr et al. 1982; Ezaki and Hayashi 1992; Katopo et al. 2002; Oh et al. 2008a, b).
Kawai et al. (2007b) treated potato starch–water mixtures at water contents of 30–90 % w/w with pressures of 400–1200 MPa at 40 °C for 1 h and presented a state diagram. Pressure gelatinization and pressure-induced retrogradation were evaluated from endothermic peaks by differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). As shown in Fig. 20.8, an endothermic peak, which corresponds to the enthalpy change upon gelatinization (ΔH gel), can be observed at approximately 75 °C, whereas another peak at approximately 58 °C corresponds to the enthalpy change upon melting of retrograded starch (ΔH retro). The value of ΔH gel decreased upon pressure gelatinization, and increased gelatinization was achieved with increasing pressure in starches with higher water content (Fig. 20.9). On the other hand, retrogradation was observed with completely or partially pressure-gelatinized starch, and the value of ΔH retro tended to increase with decreased water content of the starch samples and with increased treatment pressure (Fig. 20.10). Taking into account that the non-treated potato starch showed H gel = 20 ± 2 J/g (dry starch basis), the state of the HHP-treated potato starches was classified into five categories: complete gelatinization (ΔH gel = 0 J/g), complete gelatinization with retrogradation (ΔH gel = 0 J/g and ΔH retro > 0 J/g), partial gelatinization (ΔH gel < 18 [=20 – 2] J/g and ΔH retro = 0 J/g), partial gelatinization with retrogradation (ΔH gel < 18 J/g and ΔH retro > 0 J/g), and thermodynamically no change (ΔH gel ≥ 18 J/g and ΔH retro = 0 J/g). The classification was presented as a state diagram (treatment pressure vs. starch content ) (Fig. 20.11). Data for depicting the state diagrams were physicochemically analyzed using mathematical models and were compared with those of wheat starch–water mixtures (5–80 % w/w) published by Baks et al. (2008a). Thereafter, the state diagram of potato starch –water mixtures at water contents of 30–90 % w/w and pressures of 400–1000 MPa (Fig. 20.12) was extended in terms of treatment temperature (20–70 °C) (Kawai et al. 2012). With increased temperature and/or water content, the pressure required for complete gelatinization decreased. Retrogradation was observed at starch contents ranging from 20 % to 70%w/w, which is wider than the reported general range of 30–60 % w/w observed after heat gelatinization at ambient pressure (Hoover 1995). At a water content of 80 %, retrogradation was observed at relatively low temperatures of 20 °C and 30 °C, while at a water content of 30 %, retrogradation only occurred at relatively high temperatures of 60 °C (only at 1000 MPa) and 70 °C (at 400–1000 MPa).
1.9 Effect of Treatment Time on Pressure Gelatinization
Only a few reports have examined pressure gelatinization of starch as a function of pressure holding time (Stolt et al. 2001; Buckow et al. 2007; Kawai et al. 2007a). Kawai et al. (2007a) reported on the effect of treatment time (1, 18, and 66 h) on gelatinization and retrogradation of potato starch–water mixtures (water content: 30–90 % w/w) treated at 600–1000 MPa. The values of ΔH gel and ΔH retro were dependent on the water content and were not affected by treatment time in the tested range (Fig. 20.13). However, the onset temperature of gelatinization (T gel) increased with increased water content and treatment time (Fig. 20.14). Although long-time HHP treatment is impractical from the viewpoint of running cost in the food and starch industries, it is of fundamental importance to understand gelatinization and retrogradation properties o f HHP-treated starch , especially from the viewpoint of annealing.
1.10 Effect of Amylose on Pressure Gelatinization
Amylose is considered to play an important role in pressure gelatinization. Fukami et al. (2010) pointed out that amylose maintains the granular structure of HHP-treated (600 MPa and 40 °C for 1 h) normal and waxy maize starches. When completely gelatinized (as confirmed by DSC and birefringence), the granules of waxy maize starch lost their granular structure, while those of normal maize starch maintained their granular shape although they were swollen (Fig. 20.15). Buckow et al. (2009) also demonstrated that temperature and pressure stabilities of high amylose maize starches are significantly higher than those of waxy and normal starches. Blaszczak et al. (2007c) subjected waxy maize, amylopectin wheat, and amylopectin potato starches in excess water to 650 MPa for 9 min and measured the relaxation time constants of the starch gels. Two different relaxations were observed, indicating different mobility of water molecules due to differences in the structure of the waxy or amylopectin starch gels.
1.11 Toward Practical Applications of Pressure-Gelatinized Starches
For utilization of pressure-gelatinized starch, a recent publication on starch-based hydrogels is of interest (Szepes et al. 2008). Gels were prepared using potato starch via HHP treatment with the aim of drug formulation. The effect of HHP treatment on the binding of odorants to starch was studied by using maize starches (Blaszczak 2007; Blaszczak et al. 2007c). Yamada et al. (1998) reported on some trials introducing fatty acids to ball-milled starch granules with HHP treatment. However, they focused on ball mill treatment rather tha n HHP treatment, and the effect of HHP on the fatty acid introduction was not clearly described.
HHP treatment has been applied to study its effect on food or its model system . The influence of potato starch on HHP-treated surimi gels (400 and 650 MPa, 10 min) was compared with heat-treated gels (90 °C, 40 min) (Tabilo-Munizaga and Barbosa-Cánovas 2005). The applied pressures seem to be insufficient for gelatinization, although the water holding capacity of the HHP-treated surimi gels was higher than for heat-treated gels. Huttner et al. (2009) evaluated impacts of HHP on oat batters, and Barcenas et al. (2010) reported microbial, physical, and structural changes in HHP-treated wheat dough. Vallons and Arendt (2010) studied HHP-induced rheological changes of wheat flour–water suspensions . Ten-min treatment of starch-gluten suspension at 400 or 600 MPa led to starch gelatinization and formation of protein network, which promoted strengthening of the flour structure. However, gelatinization of starch due to HHP treatment was the main cause of the enhanced viscoelastic properties.
Watanabe et al. (1991) found that the cooking properties of aged rice grains were improved by HHP treatment and that optimum pressure was 100 MPa in treatments at 20 °C for 10 min. Increasing pressure during HHP treatment at 0.1–600 MPa and 20–70 °C for up to 2 h facilitated gelatinization and improved water uptake and moisture equilibrium of Thai glutinous rice during soaking (Ahromrit et al. 2006, 2007). Basmati rice flour slurry and extracted rice starch were completely HHP-gelatinized after 15 min at 650 MPa and 550 MPa (appr oximately at room temperature), respectively (Ahmed et al. 2007). Lille and Autio (2007) evaluated the size and number of ice crystals in HHP-frozen starch gels using size and total area of pores in microscopic images of thawed gel. This study showed that average size and total area occupied by the pores were clearly reduced by HHP freezing. Kweon et al. (2008) indicated that sodium chloride and sucrose have solute-induced barostablizing (or piezostabilizing) effects on HHP gelatinization (600 MPa at 25 °C for 15 min) of maize starch. Application of HHP to chemical conversion of starch into chemically engineered starches has been reported recently. For example, HHP can enhance the decrease of thermally generated radicals (Blaszczak et al. 2008), acid hydrolysis (Lee et al. 2006; Choi et al. 2009b), cross-linking (Hwang et al. 2009; Kim et al. 2012a, b), phosphorylation (Blaszczak et al. 2010, 2011), acetylation (Choi et al. 2009a; Kim et al. 2010), and hydroxypropylation (Kim et al. 2011) of maize and potato starches. Blaszczak et al. (2011) reported a decrease in thermally generated radicals in phosphorylation of maize starches with various amylose content after HHP treatment. HHP-assisted chemical conversion of starch has been reviewed by Kim et al. (2012b).
For industrial applications of HHP-treated starch, it is necessary to predict and control the process condition of gelatinization and retrogradation while demonstrating possible ways of commercialization of HHP-treated starches. An approach depicting state diagrams of HHP-gelatinized starches of various botanical origins would promote prediction and control of the process. New applications of HHP treatment to chemical modifications and other industrial process may be of gre at interest. It is also expected that analysis of HHP-treated starch through various and novel approaches will contribute to better understanding of starch granular structures.
2 Conclusions
The effect of HHP treatment on the behavior of starch has been studied since the (possibly) first description by Meyer et al. (1929), and experiments have been carried out by anisotropic and isotropic compressions and high pressure extrusion.
It has been revealed that starch in the presence of water can be gelatinized by HHP treatment. Functional and rheological properties of HHP-treated starches such as viscosity, pasting properties, retrogradation, and enzymatic digestibility often differ from the properties of heat-gelatinized starches. One difference is that regular (non-waxy) starch granules can be swollen and gelatinized by HHP but still retain their granular shapes. These phenomena may be affected by amylose content. Nonetheless, new insights into the mechanics of HHP-induced starch hydration and gelatinization could be achieved through in situ studies with diamond anvil cells, which permit the use of infrared and Raman spectroscopies, X-ray diffraction, and optical microscopy techniques.
Systematic studies on different types of starches at a wide range of pressures, temperatures, times, and water content are still rare. Investigations of microstructural changes of different starches during HHP treatment would be of interest in order to gain a better understanding of the interplay of amylose and amylopectin. Similarly, a comparison of crystallinity and molecular order within granules of HHP-treated and heat-treated starches can provide new information on the underlying mechanisms of starch granule swelling under different physical conditions.
A detailed study on the effect of water content on pressure gelatinization of potato starch showed that the state diagram (treatment pressure vs. water content) can classify the state of HHP-treated starch into five categories: complete gelatinization into five categories: complete gelatinization, complete gelatinization with retrogradation, partial gelatinization, partial gelatinization with retrogradation, and thermodynamically no change. Such state diagrams can be of practical use and, thus, remain important to the food industry for preparing HHP-treated starches and foods with defined properties.
Sugars and salts are common co-solutes in starchy foods, and thus the effects of such additives on pressure gelatinization have been investigated from the viewpoint of their solute-induced stabilization. However, further studies on the influence of saccharides, fibers, fats, and proteins, for example, on gelatinization under pressure may be needed to make this process of practical interest in the food industry. Recent studies also suggest that HHP treatment can enhance flour properties post-milling by structure modification of proteins and partial swelling of the starch granules.
Finally, HHP can also achieve targeted gelatinization degrees in starch, possibly resulting in a product with defined enzymatic digestibility and glycemic response. HHP-treated starch also gives unique retrogradation patterns, which can be attractive in terms of food functionality as nondigestible starch and/or fat replacers in low-energy formulations.
Abbreviations
- CP/MAS 13C NMR:
-
Cross-polarization/magic angle spinning 13C nuclear magnetic resonance
- DSC:
-
Differential scanning calorimetry (-meter)
- DTA:
-
Differential thermal analysis
- DTG:
-
Differential thermal gravimetry
- FTIR:
-
Fourier transform infrared
- HHP:
-
High hydrostatic pressure
- ΔH gel :
-
Enthalpy change upon gelatinization measured by DSC
- ΔH retro :
-
Enthalpy change upon melting of retrograded starch measured by DSC
- RVA:
-
Rapid visco-analyzer
- SEM:
-
Scanning electron microscopy
- T gel :
-
Onset temperature of gelatinization measured by DSC
- TG:
-
Thermal gravimetry
- UV–Vis:
-
Ultraviolet visible
References
Ahmed J, Ramaswamy HS, Ayad A, Alli I, Alvarez P (2007) Effect of high-pressure treatment on rheological, thermal and structural changes in Basmati rice flour slurry. J Cereal Sci 46:148–156
Ahromrit A, Ledward DA, Niranjan K (2006) High pressure induced water uptake characteristics of Thai glutinous rice. J Food Eng 72:225–233
Ahromrit A, Ledward DA, Niranjan K (2007) Kinetics of high pressure facilitated starch gelatinisation in Thai glutinous rice. J Food Eng 79:834–841
Baks T, Bruins ME, Janssen AEM, Boom RM (2008a) Effect of pressure and temperature on the gelatinization of starch at various starch concentrations. Biomacromolecules 9:296–304
Baks T, Bruins ME, Matser AM, Janssen AEM, Boom RM (2008b) Effect of gelatinization and hydrolysis conditions on the selectivity of starch hydrolysis with a-amylase from Bacillus licheniformis. J Agric Food Chem 56:488–495
Barcenas ME, Altamirano-Fortoul R, Rosell CM (2010) Effect of high pressure processing on wheat dough and bread characteristics. LWT-Food Sci Technol 43:12–19
Bauer BA, Hartmann M, Sommer K, Knorr D (2004) Optical in situ analysis of starch granules under high pressure with a high pressure cell. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 5:293–298
Bauer BA, Knorr D (2004) Electrical conductivity: a new tool for the determination of high hydrostatic pressure-induced starch gelatinisation. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 5:437–442
Bauer BA, Knorr D (2005) The impact of pressure, temperature and treatment time on starches: pressure-induced starch gelatinisation as pressure time temperature indicator for high hydrostatic pressure processing. J Food Eng 68:329–334
Blaszczak W, Fornal J, Valverde S, Garrido L (2005a) Pressure-induced changes in the structure of corn starches with different amylose content. Carbohydr Polym 61:132–140
Blaszczak W, Valverde S, Fornal J (2005b) Effect of high pressure on the structure of potato starch. Carbohydr Polym 59:377–383
Blaszczak W (2007) Effect of high pressure, time of treatment and polysaccharide composition on the physico-chemical properties of Hylon VII and waxy maize starch. In: Yuryev V, Tomasik P, Bertoft E (eds) Starch: achievements in understanding of structure and functionality. Nova Science Publishers, Inc., New York, pp 179–228
Blaszczak W, Fornal J, Kiseleva VI, Yuryev VP, Sergeev AI, Sadowska J (2007a) Effect of high pressure on thermal, structural and osmotic properties of waxy maize and Hylon VII starch blends. Carbohydr Polym 68:387–396
Blaszczak W, Misharina TA, Yuryev VP, Fornal J (2007b) Effect of high pressure on binding aroma compounds by maize starches with different amylose content. LWT-Food Sci Technol 40:1841–1848
Blaszczak W, Wasserman LA, Fornal J, Yuryev VP (2007c) Effect of high hydrostatic pressure on the structure and gelling properties of amylopectin starches. Pol J Food Nutr Sci 57:475–480
Blaszczak W, Bidzinska E, Dyrek K, Fornal J, Wenda E (2008) Effect of high hydrostatic pressure on the formation of radicals in maize starches with different amylose content. Carbohydr Polym 74:914–921
Blaszczak W, Bidzinska E, Dyrek K, Fornal J, Wenda E (2010) EPR study of the influence of high hydrostatic pressure on the formation of radicals in phosphorylated potato starch. Carbohydr Polym 82:1256–1263
Blaszczak W, Bidzinska E, Dyrek K, Fornal J, Michalec M, Wenda E (2011) Effect of phosphorylation and pretreatment with high hydrostatic pressure on radical processes in maize starches with different amylose contents. Carbohydr Polym 85:86–96
Brown HT, Heron J (1879) Contributions to the history of starch and its transformations. J Chem Soc Trans 35:596–654
Buckow R (2006) Pressure and temperature effects on the enzymatic conversion of biopolymers. Department of Food Biotechnology and Food Process Engineering, Berlin University of Technology, Berlin, p 181
Buckow R, Heinz V, Knorr D (2007) High pressure phase transition kinetics of maize starch. J Food Eng 81:469–475
Buckow R, Jankowiak L, Knorr D, Versteeg C (2009) Pressure-temperature phase diagrams of maize starches with different amylose contents. J Agric Food Chem 57:11510–11516
Choi H-S, Kim H-S, Park C-S, Kim B-Y, Baik M-Y (2009a) Ultra high pressure (UHP)-assisted acetylation of corn starch. Carbohydr Polym 78:862–868
Choi HW, Lee JH, Ahn SC, Kim BY, Baik MY (2009b) Effects of ultra high pressure, pressing time and HCI concentration on non-thermal starch hydrolysis using ultra high pressure. Starch-Starke 61:334–343
Donovan JW (1979) Phase-transitions of the starch-water system. Biopolymers 18:263–275
Douzals JP, Marechal PA, Coquille JC, Gervais P (1996a) Microscopic study of starch gelatinization under high hydrostatic pressure. J Agric Food Chem 44:1403–1408
Douzals JP, Maréchal PA, Coquille JC, Gervais P (1996b) Comparative study of thermal and high pressure treatments upon wheat starch suspensions. In: Hayashi R, Balny C (eds) High pressure bioscience and biotechnology. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 433–438
Douzals JP, Perrier Cornet JM, Gervais P, Coquille JC (1998) High-pressure gelatinization of wheat starch and properties of pressure-induced gels. J Agric Food Chem 46:4824–4829
Douzals JP, Perrier-Cornet JM, Coquille JC, Gervais P (2001) Pressure-temperature phase diagram for wheat starch. J Agric Food Chem 49:873–876
Ezaki S, Hayashi R (1992) High pressure effects on starch: structural change and retrogradation. In: Balny C, Hayashi R, Heremans K, Masson P (eds) High pressure and biotechnology. John Libbey Eurotext Ltd., London, pp 163–165
Fukami K, Kawai K, Hatta T, Taniguchi H, Yamamoto K (2010) Physical properties of normal and waxy corn starches treated with high hydrostatic pressure. J Appl Glycosci 57:67–72
Gidley MJ, Bociek SM (1985) Molecular organization in starches: a 13C CP/MAS NMR study. J Am Chem Soc 107:7040–7044
Gomes MRA, Clark R, Ledward DA (1998) Effects of high pressure on amylases and starch in wheat and barley flours. Food Chem 63:363–372
Hayashi R (1987) Possibility of high pressure technology for cooking, sterilization, processing and storage of foods. Syokuhintokaihatsu 22:55–62 (in Japanese)
Hayashi R, Hayashida A (1989) Increased amylase digestibility of pressure-treated starch. Agric Biol Chem 53:2543–2544
Heinz V, Buckow R, Knorr D (2005) Catalytic activity of b-amylase from barley in different pressure/temperature domains. Biotechnol Prog 21:1632–1638
Hibi Y, Matsumoto T, Hagiwara S (1993) Effect of high-pressure on the crystalline-structure of various starch granules. Cereal Chem 70:671–676
Hizukuri S, Kaneko T, Takeda Y (1983) Measurement of the chain length of amylopectin and its relevance to the origin of crystalline polymorphism of starch granules. Biochim Biophys Acta 760:188–191
Hizukuri S (1985) Relationship between the distribution of the chain-length of amylopectin and the crystalline-structure of starch granules. Carbohydr Res 141:295–306
Hoover R (1995) Starch retrogradation. Food Rev Int 11:331–346
Hu X, Xu X, Jin Z, Tian Y, Bai Y, Xie Z (2011) Retrogradation properties of rice starch gelatinized by heat and high hydrostatic pressure (HHP). J Food Eng 106:262–266
Huttner EK, Dal Bello F, Poutanen K, Arendt EK (2009) Fundamental evaluation of the impact of high hydrostatic pressure on oat batters. J Cereal Sci 49:363–370
Hwang D, Kim B, Baik M (2009) Physicochemical properties of non-thermally cross-linked corn starch with phosphorus oxychloride using ultra high pressure (UHP). Starch-Starke 61:438–447
Iwaki K, Sugimoto Y (2004) Properties of tochinomi (Japanese horse chestnut) and hishinomi (water chestnut) starches. J Home Econ Jpn 55:13–19
Jane J-L, Ao Z, Duvick SA, Wiklund M, Yoo S-H, Wong K-S, Gardner C (2003) Structures of amylopectin and starch granules: how are they synthesized? J Appl Glycosci 50:167–172
Jones CR (1940) The production of mechanically damaged starch in milling as a governing factor in the diastatic activity of flour. Cereal Chem 17:133–169
Katopo H, Song Y, Jane J (2002) Effect and mechanism of ultrahigh hydrostatic pressure on the structure and properties of starches. Carbohydr Polym 47:233–244
Kawai K, Fukami K, Yamamoto K (2007a) Effects of treatment pressure, holding time, and starch content on gelatinization and retrogradation properties of potato starch-water mixtures treated with high hydrostatic pressure. Carbohydr Polym 69:590–596
Kawai K, Fukami K, Yamamoto K (2007b) State diagram of potato starch-water mixtures treated with high hydrostatic pressure. Carbohydr Polym 67:530–535
Kawai K, Fukami K, Yamamoto K (2012) Effect of temperature on gelatinization and retrogradation in high hydrostatic pressure treatment of potato starch-water mixtures. Carbohydr Polym 87:314–321
Kim H-S, Choi H-S, Kim B-Y, Baik M-Y (2010) Characterization of acetylated corn starch prepared under ultrahigh pressure (UHP). J Agric Food Chem 58:3573–3579
Kim H-S, Choi H-S, Kim B-Y, Baik M-Y (2011) Ultra high pressure (UHP)-assisted hydroxypropylation of corn starch. Carbohydr Polym 83:755–761
Kim H-S, Hwang D-K, Kim B-Y, Baik M-Y (2012a) Cross-linking of corn starch with phosphorus oxychloride under ultra high pressure. Food Chem 130:977–980
Kim H-S, Kim B-Y, Baik M-Y (2012b) Application of ultra high pressure (UHP) in starch chemistry. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 52:123–141
Kim K, Hamdy MK (1987) Depolymerization of starch by high pressure extrusion. J Food Sci 52:1387–1390
Knorr D, Heinz V, Buckow R (2006) High pressure application for food biopolymers. Biochim Biophys Acta 1764:619–631
Kudla E, Tomasik P (1992) The modification of starch by high pressure: Part II. Compression of starch with additives. Starch-Starke 44:253–259
Kudta E, Tomasik P (1992) The modification of starch by high pressure: Part I. Air- and oven-dried potato starch. Starch-Starke 44:167–173
Kweon M, Slade L, Levine H (2008) Role of glassy and crystalline transitions in the responses of corn starches to heat and high pressure treatments: prediction of solute-induced barostabilty from solute-induced thermostability. Carbohydr Polym 72:293–299
Le Thanh-Blicharz J, Lewandowicz G, Baszczak W, Prochaska K (2012) Starch modified by high-pressure homogenisation of the pastes—some structural and physico-chemical aspects. Food Hydrocolloids 27:347–354
Lee J-H, Choi H-W, Kim B-Y, Chung M-S, Kim D-S, Choi SW, Lee D-U, Park S-J, Hur B-Y, Baik M-Y (2006) Nonthermal starch hydrolysis using ultra high pressure: I. Effects of acids and starch concentrations. LWT-Food Sci Technol 39:1125–1132
Lille M, Autio K (2007) Microstructure of high-pressure vs. atmospheric frozen starch gels. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 8:117–126
Liu YT, Selontulyo VO, Zhou WB (2008) Effect of high pressure on some physicochemical properties of several native starches. J Food Eng 88:126–136
Matsumoto T, Makimoto S, Taniguchi Y (1997) Effect of pressure on the mechanism of hydrolysis of maltotetraose, maltopentaose, and maltohexose catalyzed by porcine pancreatic a-amylase. Biochim Biophys Acta 1343:243–250
Mercier C, Charbonn R, Guilbot A (1968) Influence of pressure treatment on granular structure and susceptibility to enzymatic amylolysis of various starches. Starke 20:6–11
Meyer KH, Hopff H, Mark H (1929) Ein Beitrag zur Konstitution der Stärke. Berichte der Deutschen Chemischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 62:1103–1112
Muhr AH, Blanshard JMV (1982) Effect of hydrostatic pressure on starch gelatinisation. Carbohydr Polym 2:61–74
Muhr AH, Wetton RE, Blanshard JMV (1982) Effect of hydrostatic pressure on starch gelatinisation, as determined by DTA. Carbohydr Polym 2:91–102
Noguchi T, Taniguchi-Yamada A, Sato H, Suzuki T, Matsumoto S, Takano K (2003) Effect of high-pressure treatment on decomposition of potato and wheat starch by alfa-amylase. Food Preserv Sci 29:335–339 (in Japanese with English abstract)
Oh HE, Hemar Y, Anema SG, Wong M, Pinder DN (2008a) Effect of high-pressure treatment on normal rice and waxy rice starch-in-water suspensions. Carbohydr Polym 73:332–343
Oh HE, Pinder DN, Hemar Y, Anema SG, Wong M (2008b) Effect of high-pressure treatment on various starch-in-water suspensions. Food Hydrocolloids 22:150–155
Parker R, Ring SG (2001) Aspects of the physical chemistry of starch. J Cereal Sci 34:1–17
Pérez S, Baldwin P, Gallant DJ (2009) Structural features of starch. In: BeMiller J, Whistler R (eds) Starch—chemistry and technology. Academic, New York, pp 149–192
Raabe E, Knorr D (1996) Kinetics of starch hydrolysis with Bacillus amyloliquefaciens-a-amylase under high hydrostatic pressure. Starch 48:409–414
Randzio S L, Orlowska M (2005) Simultaneous and in situ analysis of thermal and volumetric properties of starch gelatinization over wide pressure and temperature ranges. Biomacromolecules 6:3045–3050
Rubens P, Snauwaert J, Heremans K, Stute R (1999) In situ observation of pressure-induced gelation of starches studied with FTIR in the diamond anvil cell. Carbohydr Polym 39:231–235
Rubens P, Heremans K (2000) Stability diagram of rice starch as determined with FTIR. High Press Res 19:161–166
Seetharaman K, Bertoft E (2013) Perspectives on the history of research on starch: Part V. On the conceptualization of amylopectin structure. Starch-Starke 65:1–7
Smeller L (2002) Pressure-temperature phase diagrams of biomolecules. Biochim Biophys Acta 1595:11–29.
Snauwaert J, Heremans K (1999) Pressure induced swelling kinetics of starch granules. In: Ludwig H (ed) Advances in high pressure bioscience and biotechnology. Springer, Berlin, pp 349–352
Stolt M, Stoforos NG, Taoukis PS, Autio K (1999) Evaluation and modelling of rheological properties of high pressure treated waxy maize starch dispersions. J Food Eng 40:293–298
Stolt M, Oinonen S, Autio K (2001) Effect of high pressure on the physical properties of barley starch. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 1:167–175
Stute R, Kingler RW, Boguslawski S, Eshtiaghi MN, Knorr D (1996) Effects of high pressure treatment on starches. Starch 48:399–408
Sugimoto Y, Watsuji T (2006) Some properties of lentil starches (Lens culinaris MEDIC). J Home Econ Jpn 57:635–640 (in Japanese with English abstract)
Szepes A, Makai Z, Blumer C, Mader K, Kasa P, Szabo-Revesz P (2008) Characterization and drug delivery behaviour of starch-based hydrogels prepared via isostatic ultrahigh pressure. Carbohydr Polym 72:571–578
Tabilo-Munizaga G, Barbosa-Cánovas GV (2005) Pressurized and heat-treated surimi gels as affected by potato starch and egg white: microstructure and water-holding capacity. LWT-Food Sci Technol 38:47–57
Thevelein JM, Van Assche JA, Heremans K, Gerlsma SY (1981) Gelatinisation temperature of starch, as influenced by high pressure. Carbohydr Res 93:304–307
Vainionpää J, Forssell P, Virtanen T (1993) High-pressure gelatinization of barley starch at low moisture levels and elevated temperature. Starch-Stärke 45:19–24
Vallons KJR, Arendt EK (2010) Understanding high pressure-induced changes in wheat flour-water suspensions using starch-gluten mixtures as model systems. Food Res Int 43:893–901
Waigh TA, Hopkinson I, Donald AM, Butler MF, Heidelbach F, Riekel C (1997) Analysis of the native structure of starch granules with X-ray microfocus diffraction. Macromolecules 30:3813–3820
Waigh TA, Gidley MJ, Komanshek BU, Donald AM (2000) The phase transformations in starch during gelatinisation: a liquid crystalline approach. Carbohydr Res 328:165–176
Watanabe M, Arai E, Honma K, Fuke S (1991) Improving the cooking properties of aged rice grains by pressurization and enzymatic treatment. Agric Biol Chem 55:2725–2731
Yamada T, Kato T, Tamaki S, Teranishi K, Hisamatsu M (1998) Introduction of fatty acids to starch granules by ultra-high-pressure treatment. Starch-Starke 50:484–486
Yamamoto K, Kawai K, Fukami K, Koseki S (2009) Pressure gelatinization of potato starch. Food 3(SI):57–66
Zobel HF (1984) Gelatinization of starch and mechanical properties of starch pastes. In: Whistler RL, BeMiller JN, Paschall EF (eds) Starch: chemistry and technology. Academic, London, pp 285–309
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Yamamoto, K., Buckow, R. (2016). Pressure Gelatinization of Starch. In: Balasubramaniam, V., Barbosa-Cánovas, G., Lelieveld, H. (eds) High Pressure Processing of Food. Food Engineering Series. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3234-4_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3234-4_20
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-3233-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-3234-4
eBook Packages: Chemistry and Materials ScienceChemistry and Material Science (R0)