LWT - Food Science and Technology 135 (2021) 110045

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

LWT
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/lwt

Quinoa protein isolate supplemented pasta: Nutritional, physical, textural

and morphological characterization
Antima Gupta a, *, Savita Sharma a, Vijay Kumar Reddy Surasani b
a
Department of Food Science and Technology, College of Agriculture, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, 141004, India
b
Department of Harvest and Post-harvest Technology, College of Fisheries, Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Science University, Ludhiana, Punjab, 141004, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In this study, quinoa protein isolate (QPI) (0, 4.0, 8.0 and 12.0 g/100 g) incorporated pasta was characterize
Pasta concerning nutritional, physical, textural and morphological attributes. Supplementation of QPI from 0 to 12.0
Supplementation g/100 g significantly (p < 0.05) increased the protein content in pasta from 11.73 to 21.52 g/100 g. The addition
Quinoa protein isolate (QPI)
of QPI increased the optimal cooking time, swelling index, water absorption, cooking loss, and protein loss but
Texture
SEM
decreased the whiteness index and viscosity. QPI supplementation caused significant changes in the quality
parameter within satisfactory limit. Moreover, the firmness of pasta significantly increased from 0.367 to 0.497 N
(p < 0.05). It was noticed that QPI supplementation of up to 8.0 g/100 g, showed higher sensory scores com­
parable to the control. Further increase in QPI level decreased the overall acceptability of pasta. Microstructure
analysis confirmed that increased QPI levels increased the protein matrix around the starch granules. Thus, QPI
supplementation can be a promising material for the food industry to produce high-quality, low-cost protein-
enriched pasta.

1. Introduction
Pasta products are one among the most popular and convenient
products available at market shelves, due to low cost, nutritional
composition, ease of preparation, transportation and longer shelf life
(Nilusha, Jayasinghe, Perera, & Perera, 2019). World total production of
pasta reached 14.3 million tonnes in 2018 with Italy ranked one (3.24
million tonnes) and India ranked 22nd (1.0 million tonnes) in the pro­
duction worldwide (UNAFPA, 2018). Pasta is traditionally prepared
from semolina that contains starch as a principal constituent followed by
protein, fat, vitamins, minerals and bioactive compounds (Gull, Prasad,
& Kumar, 2018). The protein content of semolina ranged between 9.0
and 14.0 g/100 g, but it doesn’t have well balanced essential amino acid
composition with lysine as a limiting amino acid.
In recent past, many studies have been conducted to improve the
protein quality of pasta, through supplementation with various proteins
such as-lupin meal (Mahmoud, Nassef, & Basuny, 2012), shrimp meat
(Ramya, Prabhasankar, Gowda, Modi, & Bhaskar, 2015), mushroom
powder (Lu, Brennan, Serventi, Mason, & Brennan, 2016), soy protein
isolate (Mishra & Bhatt, 2017), fish powder (Desai, Brennan, & Brennan,
2018) and pangas protein isolate (Reddy Surasani, Singh, Gupta, &
Sharma, 2019). With the gradual shift in consumer preference from
meat-based foods to plant-based foods, the potential plant-based protein
could be identified and aimed towards specific food applications as a
functional food ingredients. For such purpose, pseudocereals would be a
potential protein source, as they contain well balanced essential amino
acid that complements low protein diets.
Quinoa is a nutritionally dense crop of Andean origin and contains a
considerable amount of protein, carbohydrate, fat, vitamins, minerals
and dietary fibre (Nowak, Du, & Charrondière, 2015). Quinoa also
contains health-beneficial compounds such as, flavonoids, phenolic
acids, steroids, terpenoids and nitrogen containing compounds (Lin
et al., 2019). Alongside, it contains anti-nutritional compounds majorly
saponins in the hulls, that’s why quinoa is de-hulled and washed before
consumption. However, quinoa protein draws all attention due to high
protein content, ranging between 12.0 and 23.0 g/100 g and considered
as a good source of lysine (5.4 g/100 g), histidine (2.9 g/100 g) and
methionine (3.6 g/100 g) compared to semolina (Dakhili, Abdolaliza­
deh, Hosseini, Shojaee-Aliabadi, & Mirmoghtadaie, 2019). The most
refined form of quinoa protein is protein isolate which contains >90
g/100 g protein (López, Galante, Robson, Boeris, & Spelzini, 2018).
In developing countries, an individual depends on cereals as a staple

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: antimagupta@pau.edu, ntmgpt06@gmail.com (A. Gupta).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2020.110045
Received 26 April 2020; Received in revised form 6 July 2020; Accepted 9 August 2020
Available online 13 August 2020
0023-6438/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Gupta et al.
diet, which lacks certain essential amino acids, causing Protein Energy
Malnutrition (PEM). Therefore, the fortification of low protein foods
with protein is the best alternative to overcome PEM (Arora, Kamal, &
Sharma, 2018; Reddy Surasani et al., 2019). Thus, the present study
aimed to develop quinoa protein isolates supplemented pasta and study
the effect of supplementation on nutritional, physical, textural and
morphological attributes of pasta.
2. Material and methods
2.1. Raw material
Semolina was procured from the local market of Ludhiana, Punjab
(India) with a protein content of 11.73 g/100 g, P/L ratio 0.7 and W
(strength) of 200. QPI was prepared by isoelectric precipitation method
using hydrochloric acid (HCl) and sodium hydroxide (NaOH) of 2.0
mol/L concentration. Optimum solubilisation and precipitation pH was
obtained from the multiple trials and defatted quinoa flour was solubi­
lised at pH 10.0 and precipitated at pH 4.0 followed by neutralization
and freeze-drying using lyophilizer (Macro Scientific Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, India) (López et al., 2018).
2.2. Preparation of blends
Semolina was supplemented with QPI powder on w/w basis at the
level of 0, 4.0, 8.0 and 12.0 g/100 g and mixed well by passing 3 times
through sieve with a mesh size of 20.0 (840 μm).
2.3. Preparation of pasta
Blends of QPI supplemented pasta was mixed with an optimum
amount of water in a mixing chamber of pasta extruder (Model: Dolly La
Monferrina, Italy) for 10–12 min to hydrate the particles uniformly. The
dough was extruded at a temperature of 37–40 ◦ C, using an adjustable
shell-shaped die (No. 227) with a corrugated opening of 30.0 mm. Shell
[Weight ​ of ​ cooked ​ pasta − Weight ​ of ​ raw ​ pasta](g)
Water ​ absorption =
Weight ​ of ​ raw ​ pasta ​ (g)
shaped pasta was cut into a desirable length of 2.5 cm, by adjusting the
rotatory cutter speed. The extruded pasta was dried at 45–50 ◦ C for 4–5
h using a drying oven (Naarang Scientifics, New Delhi, India) which
were packed in low-density poly ethylene (LDPE) laminate pouches and
stored at 4 ◦ C till further analysis.
2.4. Nutritional composition
The pasta samples were analyzed for moisture, crude protein, crude
fat and ash content as per the method described in AACC (2000) whilst
[Volume ​ displaced ​ by ​ cooked ​ pasta − Volume ​ displaced ​ by ​ raw ​ pasta](mL)
Volume ​ expansion =
Weight ​ of ​ raw ​ pasta
carbohydrate content was calculated by subtracting the sum of moisture,
crude protein, crude fat and ash from 100. The energy was calculated
using the following equation [1].
2
LWT 135 (2021) 110045
Energy ​ (Kcal) ​ = ​ [(4 ​ × ​ Crude ​ Protein) ​ + ​ (9 ​ × ​ Crude ​ Fat) ​
+ ​ (4 ​ × ​ Carbohydrate)]
[1]
2.5. Cooking profile
2.5.1. Optimal cooking time
To evaluate the optimal cooking time (OCT), 10.0 g of pasta was
cooked in deionized boiling water (100 mL) (AACC, 2000) and cooked
till the disappearance of the central white core by squeezing gently
between two glass slides or to the Al Dente stage, this stage was identified
as OCT.
2.5.2. Cooked weight
Cooked weight was calculated as the weight of 10.0 g dry pasta after
cooking (AACC, 2000).
2.5.3. Swelling index
Ten gram of pasta was cooked in 100 mL deionized boiling water for
OCT, blotted and weighed. Cooked pasta was dried to a constant mass at
105 ◦ C and weighed (Gull et al., 2018). The swelling index was
expressed as the 1 g of water/g of dry pasta and calculated by using the
following equation [2]
[Weight ​ of ​ cooked ​ pasta − Weight ​ of ​ dried ​ pasta] ​ (g)
Swelling ​ Index =
Weight ​ of ​ dried ​ pasta ​ (g)
[2]
2.5.4. Water absorption
Ten gram of pasta was cooked in 100 mL deionized boiling water for
OCT, blotted and then weighed (AACC, 2000). Water absorption of the
cooked pasta was expressed in g/100 g and calculated by using the
following equation [3]. Water used for cooking of pasta was used to
determine the cooking and protein loss.
× 100 [3]
2.5.5. Volume expansion
Ten gram pasta was transferred to a 250 mL measuring cylinder filled
with deionized water up to 200 mL and an increase in volume was noted
concerning initial volume. The sample was boiled for OCT, blotted and
the increase in volume was noted for cooked pasta (AACC, 2000). Vol­
ume expansion was expressed in mL/g and calculated by using the
following formula [4].
[4]
2.5.6. Cooking loss
Ten millilitre of the aliquot was transferred to a pre-weighed petri-
dish and dried to a constant mass at 105 ◦ C (AACC, 2000). The weight of
A. Gupta et al. LWT 135 (2021) 110045

the dry solids was noted and cooking loss was expressed as the per­ Table 1
centage of dry solids loss in water during cooking. Nutritional quality of pasta supplemented with quinoa protein isolate at
different levels.
2.5.7. Protein loss Sample Moisture Crude Crude Ash Carbohydrate Energy
Protein loss was the amount of protein loss in cooking water as the Protein Fat
percentage of total protein in the pasta. Protein loss in the cooking water (g/100 (g/100 (g/100 (g/100 (g/100 g) (Kcal/
was calculated using the Bradford (1976) method. g) g) g) g) 100 g)

Control 9.91 ± 11.73 1.85 ± 0.513 75.94 ± 0.16a 367.33

2.6. Color 0.06a ± 0.05d 0.04a ± ± 0.22a
0.03a
4.0 QPI 9.67 ± 14.98 1.28 ± 0.493 73.60 ± 365.85
Color characteristic of raw and cooked pasta was measured using
0.16b ± 0.08c 0.03b ± 0.04b ± 0.71b
Hunter Lab colorimeter (Hunter Lab Color Flex, Hunter Associates Inc., 0.02b
USA) and expressed as L* (lightness), a* (redness/greenness) and b* 8.0 QPI 9.52 ± 18.20 1.01 ± 0.453 .70.85 ± 365.29
(blueness/yellowness) (Reddy Surasani et al., 2019). The whiteness 0.02c ± 0.05b 0.01c ± 0.08c ± 0.18b
index was calculated using equation (5). 0.04b
12.0 9.46 ± 21.52 0.49 ± 0.433 68.10 ± 362.89
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ QPI 0.03d ± 0.02a 0.01d ± 0.07d ± 0.11c
Whiteness ​ Index ​ = ​ 100 ​ − (100 − L∗ )2 + ​ a∗2 + b∗2 [5] 0.01c

2.7. Pasting properties
Pasting properties of pasta were measured using Rapid-Visco
Analyzer (Model: Starch Master 2, Newport Scientific, Australia).
Ground pasta (3.5 g) was mixed with 25 mL of deionized water in a
canister. It was heated to a temperature of 50 ◦ C with continuous
paddling for 10 s and then held for 1 min. It was further heated to 95 ◦ C
for 7.13 min at the heating rate of 6 K/min and was again held for 4.42
min, followed by cooling to 50 ◦ C at the rate of 6 K/min (Gull et al.,
2018).
Results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation (S.D) (n = 3). Values in the
column with different superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05) as
assessed by Tukey’s b posthoc test.
Control: Pasta without quinoa protein isolate; 4.0 QPI: Pasta supplemented with
4.0 g/100 g quinoa protein isolate; 8.0 QPI: Pasta supplemented with 8.0 g/100
g quinoa protein isolate; 12.00: Pasta supplemented with 12.0 g/100 g quinoa
protein isolate.
subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA). Tukey’s b (p ≤ 0.05) posthoc
test was used to find the significant difference among the treatments at a
95 % level of confidence limit.

2.8. Pasta firmness 3. Result and discussion

The firmness of the cooked pasta was measured using the Texture
Analyzer (Model: TA-XT plus, Stable Micro Systems, USA) using (75
mm) probe. For measuring firmness 50 kg load cell was used, Pre-test
and Post-test speed were set to 2.0 mm/s and 10.0 mm/s, respectively
with 30 per cent compression of the original height. The maximum force
required to shear the pasta was taken as firmness from the force-time
graph.
2.9. Sensory evaluation
Sensory evaluation of the cooked pasta was done by 20 semi-trained
panelists in the Department of Food Science and Technology, Punjab
Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, India. The panelists were
asked to scale pasta for different quality parameters viz. appearance,
color, texture, flavor and overall acceptability on a 10-point hedonic
scale. The QPI enriched pasta was compared against control. Acceptance
Index (%) was calculated using the following equation [6].
Overall ​ acceptability
Acceptance ​ Index ​ (%) ​ = × 100
9
3.1. Nutritional composition
The nutritional composition of durum wheat pasta supplemented
with quinoa protein isolate (QPI) is presented in Table 1. The moisture
content of pasta was significantly (p < 0.05) reduced from 9.91 g/100
g–9.46 g/100 g. Reduction in moisture content can be correlated with
the increased interaction between protein and polysaccharides than
control (Desai et al., 2018). The most pronounced effect of supplemen­
tation was observed in its protein content. The protein content of pasta
was increased from 11.73 g/100 g for control to 14.98 g/100 g, 18.20
g/100 g and 21.52 g/100 g when supplemented with 4.0, 8.0 and 12.0 g
QPI per every 100.0 g mix. Increase in protein content was around 3.2
g/100 g with each replacement of semolina with 4.0 g of QPI, When
semolina was replaced with 2.5 g/100 g of pangas protein isolate and 5
g/100 g of mustard protein isolate, the increase in protein content was
2.35 g and 4.5 g/100 g, respectively (Alireza Sadeghi & Bhagya, 2008;
Reddy Surasani et al., 2019). Crude fat, ash, carbohydrate content and
energy values were decreased significantly (p < 0.05) with an increase
[6] in QPI content which could be attributed to the decrease in semolina
percentage in the blend.

2.10. Scanning electron microscopy

The structural morphology of raw and cooked pasta was studied
using a scanning electron microscope (SEM) (Model: Hitachi S 3400 N,
UK). The cross-section of the dried pasta was transferred onto a holding
pan and sputter-coated with gold using a vacuum evaporator for 2–3
min. Sputter coated pasta sample was transferred to the microscope
stage where it was examined at an accelerating voltage of 15 kV and a
vacuum of 9.75 × 10− 5 Pa.
2.11. Statistical analysis
The data was taken in triplicates and analyzed using IBM SPSS v.
20.0 software (SPSS, New York). Data obtained after the analysis was
3.2. Cooking profile
3.2.1. Optimal cooking time
OCT for the control sample was 6.40 min which was significantly (p
< 0.05) increased to 7.03, 7.53 and 8.20 min when supplemented with
4.0, 8.0 and 12.0 g/100 g QPI, respectively (Table 2). Oh, Seib, Ward,
and Deyoe (1985) observed a linear relationship between protein con­
tent and OCT of pasta. Results of Kaur, Sharma, Nagi, and Ranote (2013)
and Reddy Surasani et al. (2019) agree with the present study. They
reported when protein-rich pasta gets cooked, it becomes firmer and
stronger internally than pasta with low protein content. Savita, Arsh­
winder, Gurkirat, and Vikas (2013) reported that protein hinders the
hydration and swelling capacity of starch granules by surrounding them,

3
A. Gupta et al. LWT 135 (2021) 110045

Table 2
Cooking quality of pasta supplemented with quinoa protein isolate at different levels.
Sample Optimal Cooking Time Cooked weight (g/ Swelling Index Water absorption (g/ Volume expansion Cooking loss (g/ Protein loss (g/
(min) 10 g) (g/g) 100 g) (mL/g) 100 g) 100 g)

Control 6.40 ± 0.10d 21.82 ± 0.07d 1.28 ± 0.03d 118.18 ± 0.03d 1.37 ± 0.04d 3.27 ± 0.03d 0.287 ± 0.05c
4.0 QPI 7.03 ± 0.15c 21.98 ± 0.03c 1.35 ± 0.01c 119.64 ± 0.09c 1.64 ± 0.07c 4.23 ± 0.05c 0.294 ± 0.13c
8.0 QPI 7.53 ± 0.05b 22.15 ± 0.05b 1.38 ± 0.02b 121.12 ± 0.08b 1.84 ± 0.06b 4.91 ± 0.04b 0.375 ± 0.08b
12.0 8.20 ± 0.17a 22.29 ± 0.04a 1.41 ± 0.01a 122.56 ± 0.25a 2.17 ± 0.01a 6.71 ± 0.04a 0.530 ± 0.04a
QPI

Results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation (S.D) (n = 3). Values in the column with different superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05) as assessed by
Tukey’s b posthoc test.
Control: Pasta without quinoa protein isolate; 4.0 QPI: Pasta supplemented with 4.0 g/100 g quinoa protein isolate; 8.0 QPI: Pasta supplemented with 8.0 g/100 g
quinoa protein isolate; 12.00: Pasta supplemented with 12.0 g/100 g quinoa protein isolate.

Table 3
Color characteristics of raw and cooked pasta supplemented with quinoa protein isolate at different levels.
Sample L* a* b* Whiteness Index

Raw Cooked Raw Cooked Raw Cooked Raw Cooked

a a d d a a a
Control 61.21 ± 1.31 54.98 ± 0.52 0.52 ± 0.10 − 0.85 ± 0.08 15.49 ± 0.66 12.73 ± 0.63 58.22 ± 0.32 53.21 ± 0.32a
4.0 QPI 55.07 ± 0.17b 48.87 ± 0.87b 0.68 ± 0.52c − 0.66 ± 0.19c 14.34 ± 0.14ab 12.23 ± 0.59a 52.83 ± 0.32c 47.42 ± 0.08b
8.0 QPI 58.21 ± 0.33ab 46.39 ± 0.15c 1.11 ± 0.31b − 0.49 ± 0.01b 14.08 ± 0.51b 11.85 ± 0.77a 55.88 ± 2.14b 45.09 ± 0.25c
12.0 QPI 46.04 ± 2.80c 43.12 ± 1.69d 1.69 ± 0.0.03a − 0.25 ± 0.44a 11.31 ± 0.67c 10.15 ± 1.03b 44.84 ± 0.09d 42.22 ± 0.04d

Results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation (S.D) (n = 3). Values in the column with different superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05) as assessed by
Tukey’s b posthoc test.
Control: Pasta without quinoa protein isolate; 4.0 QPI: Pasta supplemented with 4.0 g/100 g quinoa protein isolate; 8.0 QPI: Pasta supplemented with 8.0 g/100 g
quinoa protein isolate; 12.00: Pasta supplemented with 12.0 g/100 g quinoa protein isolate.

thereby increasing the OCT of pasta .
3.2.2. Cooked weight
The cooked weight of the pasta was significantly (p < 0.05) increased
from 21.82 g/10 g–22.29 g/10 g with a concomitant increase in QPI
from 4.0 to 12.0 g/100 g (Table 2). This increased weight of cooked
pasta could be attributed to the water-binding and water holding ca­
pacity of quinoa protein. Besides, quinoa protein was rich in polar amino
acids which favors the water absorption and by this means the cooked
weight of the pasta increased (Escuredo, González Martín, Wells Mon­
cada, Fischer, & Hernández Hierro, 2014). Mahmoud et al. (2012)
explained that the increased cooked weight of high protein quality
noodles supplemented with lupine was due to the high protein content
of prepared lupin protein product.
3.2.3. Swelling index
With the addition of QPI, the swelling index of the pasta increased
marginally than that of control (Table 2). The swelling index of control
was 1.28 g/g which increased to 1.41 g/g with increased supplemen­
tation of QPI from 4.0 to 12.0 g/100 g might be due to the water-binding
and gelling ability of the protein. Results reported by Phongthai,
D’Amico, Schoenlechner, Homthawornchoo, and Rawdkuen (2017)
were in good compliance with the finding of the present study. Quinoa
protein reported to have good gelation property and form a gel by ag­
gregation of the unfolded protein molecules followed by string forma­
tion of the aggregates and then linkage of these string into the
three-dimensional structure (Dakhili et al., 2019).
3.2.4. Water absorption
Water absorption is the ability of the pasta to hold and retain water
against gravity and it is primarily governed by, starch, fiber, protein
content and strength of the protein network. Water absorption of the
control pasta was 118.18 g/100 g and it increased to 119.64, 121.12 and
122.56 g/100 g for 4.0, 8.0 and 12.0 g/100 g QPI supplementation level,
respectively (Table 2). Reddy Surasani et al. (2019) reported higher
water uptake in pangas protein isolate (PPI) supplemented pasta
because of the presence of polar amino acid in PPI. The results of the
present study were in accordance with the reported in the literature
(Arora et al., 2018; Savita et al., 2013). Phongthai et al. (2017) correlate
this increase in water absorption with the hydration property and gel
formation ability of the proteins.
3.2.5. Volume expansion
Volume expansion of pasta supplemented with 12.0 g/100 g QPI was
found to be highest (2.17 mL/g) in comparison to control, probably due
to the increased cooked weight, swelling index and water absorption of
the pasta (Table 2). Kaur et al. (2013) positively correlate water ab­
sorption and volume expansion property of pasta. They further
explained the increase in volume expansion with higher hydration ca­
pacity of fine particle and high protein content of isolates. Reddy Sur­
asani et al. (2019) reported a total increase in volume expansion of
60.54 percent with supplementation of pangas protein isolate from 0 to
10.0 g/100 g. The results of Savita et al. (2013) for protein supple­
mented pasta and (Wójtowicz & Mościcki, 2014) for legume enriched
pasta agree with the present study.
3.2.6. Cooking loss
Cooking loss is the leaching of soluble starch and non-starch poly­
mers in cooking water and a low amount of such solids are desirable for
the high quality of pasta. As presented in Table 2, cooking loss increased
significantly (p < 0.05) with the addition of QPI. As per AACC (2000),
the cooking loss should not exceed 9 percent, and results obtained were
well within the limit. Arora et al. (2018) reported an increased solid loss
in mushroom supplemented noodles was because of the weak protein
and starch interaction. Desai et al. (2018) observed the highest cooking
loss for 20.0 g/100 g fish powder enriched pasta (5.85 g/100 g) than that
of control (3.99 g/100 g) and the reason given was the weakening and
disruption of the gluten network that weakened the structure of pasta.
Results obtained by Kaur et al. (2013) and Ramya et al. (2015) are in
agreement with the present study. Reddy Surasani et al. (2019)
explained the increased cooking loss of pasta might be due to the dilu­
tion of gluten by a protein which hampers the formation of gluten and
starch network.
3.2.7. Protein loss
Protein loss was non-significantly affected up to 4.0 g/100 g QPI

4
A. Gupta et al.
content and thereafter it significantly increased from 0.375 g/100 g to
0.530g/100 g on increasing supplementation of QPI from 8 to 12 g/100
g (Table 2). This increase could be due to the high solubility of QPI that
resulted in more protein loss in QPI supplemented pasta. Quinoa majorly
contains albumins and globulins that are water and salt soluble (Dakhili
et al., 2019), which could be the reason for increased protein loss.
Similar results were reported by Mahmoud et al. (2012), protein loss was
increased from 3.33 to 5.20 g/100 g in whole lupine meal noodles and
3.33–4.80 g/100 g in defatted lupine meal noodles with increased
supplementation level from 0 to 25 g/100 g. They observed a correlation
between higher replacement levels of protein and nitrogen losses. Be­
sides, a weak protein matrix upon cooking results in a loose protein
network that permits more amount of exudate to escape during the
gelatinization of starch granules.
3.3. Color
The L* value of control pasta was highest (61.21 for raw and 54.98
for cooked pasta) which was significantly decreased to 46.04 and 43.12
for raw and cooked pasta, respectively at 12.0 g/100 g QPI supple­
mentation level (Table 3). Desai et al. (2018) and Reddy Surasani et al.
(2019) found lower lightness values in pasta after the addition of fish
powder and pangas protein isolate, respectively. Similar results were
recorded for b* value which indicates decreased pasta yellowness whilst
a* value was increased with increased supplementation of QPI. Alireza
Sadeghi and Bhagya (2008) found a similar trend in mustard protein
isolate (MPI) supplemented spaghetti, these changes were due to the
effect of cold extrusion and drying on the color profile of spaghetti. Wu,
Hareland, and Warner (2001) reported a darker color of spaghetti
enriched with water/alcohol washed corn gluten meal than the color of
spaghetti with semolina alone. The whiteness index of pasta was
decreased with increased content of QPI from 4.0 to 12.0 g/100 g.
3.4. Pasting properties
An increase in QPI content of pasta increased the pasting tempera­
ture whilst decreased its peak, hold, final, breakdown and setback vis­
cosities (Table 4). These changes in pasting properties of pasta flour
were due to the increased concentration of protein in the form of QPI,
which compete with starch for water availability thus hindering the
gelatinization of starch. When other constituents, especially fat and
protein present in higher concentrations, it influences the swelling and
pasting properties of starch (Mohammed, Ahmed, & Senge, 2014).
Peak temperature reflects the minimum temperature required to
induce the gelatinization of starch. In this study, pasting temperature for
control was 92.50 ◦ C which was significantly decreased to 95.43 ◦ C with
12.0 g/100 g QPI enrichment. Reddy Surasani et al. (2019) recorded
similar observations of decreased pasting temperature from 90.50 to
93.05 ◦ C with an increased concentration of pangas protein isolate.
Chinma, Ariahu, and Abu (2013) observed a correlation between pasting
temperature and water absorption capacity. The result of Yulianti,
Table 4
Pasting and textural properties of pasta supplemented with quinoa protein isolate at different levels.
Sample Peak Temperature Peak Viscosity Hold Viscosity
(◦ C) (mPa.s) (mPa.s)
Control 92.50 ± 0.40d 1259.00 ± 2.52a 1063.00 ± 5.00a
4.0 QPI 93.40 ± 0.20c 869.00 ± 6.00b 798.00 ± 0.57b
8.0 QPI 94.60 ± 0.43b 632.00 ± 3.22c 572.00 ± 2.52c
12.0 95.46 ± 0.25a 413.00 ± 4.04d 390.00 ± 3.78d
QPI
Results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation (S.D) (n = 3). Values in the column with different superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05) as assessed by
Tukey’s b posthoc test.
Control: Pasta without quinoa protein isolate; 4.0 QPI: Pasta supplemented with 4.0 g/100 g quinoa protein isolate; 8.0 QPI: Pasta supplemented with 8.0 g/100 g
quinoa protein isolate; 12.00: Pasta supplemented with 12.0 g/100 g quinoa protein isolate.
LWT 135 (2021) 110045
Sholichah, and Indrianti (2019) complied with the present study, who
attributed this increase with the insoluble complex formed between
amylose and starch that inhibits leaching of amylose from starch
granule.
Peak viscosity indicates the ability of starch to swell freely before
losing its physical integrity. In this study, peak viscosity of control was
highest (1259 mPa.s) and it decreased from 1259 to 413 mPa s with an
increase in QPI content. Jane et al. (1999) observed that a high con­
centration of amylose, protein and fat negatively affects viscosity. Reddy
Surasani et al. (2019) also observed a decrease in peak viscosity from
924 mPa s to 607 mPa s with increased pangas protein isolate (PPI)
content in pasta blend. The decrease was due to the presence of polar
amino acid in PPI that is the primary site for hydrophilic interaction and
has more affinity towards water due to polarity than semolina thus
hampering hydration and swelling property of starch. Reduction in the
availability of water inhibits the initial swelling of starch granules in
6–8 g/100 g supplemented mushroom blend (Arora et al., 2018), thus
lowering the peak viscosity.
A similar significant (p < 0.05) decrease was observed in the hold,
final, breakdown and setback viscosity from 1063 to 390 mPa s, 2469 to
1346 mPa s, 196 to 23 mPa s and 1406 to 955 mPa s, respectively with
increased QPI content. The results are in comply with the reported one
(Arora et al., 2018; Mohammed et al., 2014; Reddy Surasani et al.,
2019). Final viscosity indicates the stability of the starch paste after the
heating and cooling cycle which reflects QPI enriched pasta has lower
stability during cooking. The reduction could also be linked with the
incomplete gelatinization of starch due to less availability of water in the
presence of polar amino acid in QPI (Dakhili et al., 2019). High break­
down viscosity flour forms a weak gel and most likely to disintegrate
under heat and shear stress and vice-versa (Singh, McCarthy, & Singh,
2006). Thus, QPI supplemented pasta has lower breakdown viscosity,
thereby forming strong gel after heating and cooling cycle. Besides, QPI
pasta contains more protein molecules that form an insoluble network
that entraps swollen and gelatinized starch granules thereby preventing
pasta disruption. Tsakama, Mwangwela, Manani, and Mahungu (2010)
observed a positive correlation between peak and breakdown viscosity.
Setback viscosity is a measure of retrogradation of starch granules. The
lower viscosity of QPI enriched pasta indicates less retrogradation than
control pasta which could be attributed to the slower recoiling of starch
due to lower amylose content (Sanni, 2012).
3.5. Pasta firmness
Firmness reflects the strength of the bond and integrity of the protein
matrix present in pasta after cooking. An increase in firmness was
observed from 0.367 to 0.497 N with an increased level of QPI from 4.0
to 12.0 g/100 g, which might be due to the thermal denaturation of the
protein during cooking that enhances the firmness. A similar trend was
observed by (Desai et al., 2018) for fish powder and the reason was the
interaction between fish protein and insoluble network of pasta, forming
a matrix structure leading to an increase in firmness. Laleg, Barron,
Final Viscosity Breakdown Viscosity Set back Viscosity Firmness (N)
(mPa.s) (mPa.s) (mPa.s)
2469.00 ± 5.51a 196.00 ± 7.00a 1406.00 ± 9.24a 0.367 ± 0.14c
2169.00 ± 2.52b 70.00 ± 6.51b 1371.00 ± 2.00b 0.438 ± 0.09b
1775.00 ± 5.03c 60.00 ± 4.58b 1203.00 ± 4.35c 0.463 ±
0.23ab
1346.00 ± 2.65d 23.00 ± 2.00c 955.00 ± 1.15d 0.497 ± 0.12a
5
A. Gupta et al. LWT 135 (2021) 110045

Table 5
Sensory evaluation of pasta supplemented with quinoa protein isolate at different levels.
Sample Appearance Color Texture Flavor Overall Acceptability Acceptance Index (%)
a a a a a
Control 8.60 ± 0.54 8.60 ± 0.44 8.40 ± 0.89 8.40 ± 0.89 8.50 ± 0.75 94.44a
4.0 QPI 7.40 ± 0.55b 7.60 ± 0.89c 7.00 ± 0.27b 7.20 ± 0.42c 7.30 ± 0.32b 81.11b
8.0 QPI 7.40 ± 0.89b 7.80 ± 1.09b 7.00 ± 0.54b 7.40 ± 0.89b 7.40 ± 0.67b 82.22b
12.0 QPI 6.40 ± 0.58c 6.40 ± 0.54d 5.40 ± 0.55c 5.00 ± 1.00d 5.80 ± 0.32c 64.44c

Results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation (S.D) (n = 20). Values in the column with different superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05) as assessed by
Tukey’s b posthoc test.
Control: Pasta without quinoa protein isolate; 4.0 QPI: Pasta supplemented with 4.0 g/100 g quinoa protein isolate; 8.0 QPI: Pasta supplemented with 8.0 g/100 g
quinoa protein isolate; 12.00: Pasta supplemented with 12.0 g/100 g quinoa protein isolate.

Santé-Lhoutellier, Walrand, and Micard (2016) reported that protein
additive increases the firmness of pasta, which is consistent with the
present result. The result is in good compliance with the findings re­
ported by (Alireza Sadeghi & Bhagya, 2008; Duda, Adamczak, Chel­
minska, Juszkiewicz, & Kowalczewski, 2019; Lu et al., 2016).
2019; Mahmoud et al., 2012; Mishra & Bhatt, 2017; Ramya et al., 2015).
Based on the acceptance index, it can be concluded that pasta could be
supplemented with up to 8.0 g/100 g QPI with good sensory properties.
3.7. Scanning electron microscopy

3.6. Sensory evaluation
Sensory evaluation is a measure of the overall impression of eating
quality and depicts product acceptability. Preference for all sensory at­
tributes decreased with increased QPI content (Table 5). There was no
significant difference between the sensory attributes of pasta supple­
mented with 4.0 g/100 g and 8.0 g/100 g QPI. The highest score for
color after the control group pasta was recorded for 8.0 g/100 g QPI
supplemented pasta. This change was probably due to the increased
concentration of QPI in the pasta which was originally slightly dark in
color. For pasta supplemented with 12.0 g/100 g QPI all the sensory
parameters were below the acceptance limit. The results are in good
agreement with (Arora et al., 2018; D’Amico et al., 2015; Duda et al.,
The morphology of control and QPI supplemented pasta (8.0 g/100
g) both in the raw and cooked form are illustrated in Fig. 1. Fig. 1a and b,
show numerous starch granules and protein molecules of varying sizes.
Pasta with QPI has a loose structure and non-uniform surface (Fig. 1b)
than control, which explains the leaching of solids during cooking, ac­
counting for higher cooking loss (Phongthai et al., 2017). Also, cracks
and small holes in the matrix were apparently due to the shrinkage
during extrusion and partially due to surface tension during drying
(D’Amico et al., 2015). Kim, Kee, Lee, and Yoo (2014) observed similar
cracks and holes in rice protein-enriched noodles and suggested the
addition of 1.0 g/100 g Transglutaminase (TGase) to reduce these
cracks. In Fig. 1c and d, starch and protein molecules were not visible as
starch was embedded in the protein matrix. This may be due to the

Fig. 1. Scanning Electron Microscopic images of raw and cooked pasta [ (a) Raw durum wheat semolina pasta; (b) Raw quinoa protein isolate pasta supplemented at
8.0 g/100 g level; (c) Cooked durum wheat semolina pasta; and (d) Cooked quinoa protein isolate pasta supplemented at 8.0 g/100 g level].

6
A. Gupta et al.
complex formation between starch and protein during cooking. The thin
sheet-like structure of protein holds the gelatinized starch inside it and
the thickness of the fold was more in QPI supplemented pasta than
control in Fig. 1 (c and d) (Gopalakrishnan, Menon, Padmaja, Sajeev, &
Moorthy, 2011). Control pasta had smooth surface due to complete
gluten network in which starch granules were embedded whilst in QPI
supplemented pasta, protein hampers the complete gluten network
formation thereby disrupting the continuity of gluten network that leads
to rough surface of QPI pasta.
4. Conclusion
Pasta products which are popular worldwide and low-cost non-
conventional protein sources are the need of the hour to meet the
nutritional demand of the growing population. In this regard, QPI sup­
plemented pasta will come out as an excellent source of protein with
bountiful of essential amino acids especially lysine and methionine.
From the results it can be concluded that the inclusion of QPI up to 8.0
g/100 g level in pasta increased the protein content, optimal cooking
time, water absorption, volume expansion, pasting temperature and
firmness. However, it also increased the cooking and protein loss in
acceptable limits. Microstructure revealed increased interaction be­
tween protein and starch molecules. Thus, QPI supplementation could
be a potential option to produce high-quality low-cost pasta with
enhanced nutritional and functional properties.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Antima Gupta: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Inves­
tigation, Resources, Writing - original draft. Savita Sharma: Concep­
tualization, Validation, Resources, Writing - review & editing,
Supervision, Project administration. Vijay Kumar Reddy Surasani:
Investigation, Resources, Writing - review & editing, Supervision, Proj­
ect administration.
Declaration of competing interest
All the authors do not have any sort of conflict of interest related to
this publication.
Acknowledgments
The research was funded by University Grant Commission for Senior
Research Fellowship (UGC-SRF) (Grant number: 1501/(NET-DEC.2015)
and the authors would like to thank the authorities of the Department of
Food Science and Technology and Punjab Agricultural University for
providing the facilities during the research.
References
Alireza Sadeghi, M., & Bhagya, S. (2008). Quality characterization of pasta enriched with
mustard protein isolate. Journal of Food Science, 73, S229–S237.
American Association of Cereal Chemists (AACC). (2000). Approved methods of the AACC.
St. Paul: AACC.
Arora, B., Kamal, S., & Sharma, V. P. (2018). Nutritional and quality characteristics of
instant noodles supplemented with oyster mushroom (P. ostreatus). Journal of Food
Processing and Preservation, 42, 1–8.
Bradford, M. M. (1976). A Rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram
quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Analytical
Biochemistry, 72, 248–254.
Chinma, C. E., Ariahu, C. C., & Abu, J. O. (2013). Chemical composition, functional and
pasting properties of cassava starch and soy protein concentrate blends. Journal of
Food Science & Technology, 50, 1179–1185.
Dakhili, S., Abdolalizadeh, L., Hosseini, S. M., Shojaee-Aliabadi, S., & Mirmoghtadaie, L.
(2019). Quinoa protein: Composition, structure and functional properties. Food
Chemistry, 299, 125161–125171.
Desai, A., Brennan, M. A., & Brennan, C. S. (2018). The effect of semolina replacement
with protein powder from fish (Pseudophycis bachus) on the physicochemical
characteristics of pasta. Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und -Technologie- Food Science and
Technology, 89, 52–57.
LWT 135 (2021) 110045
Duda, A., Adamczak, J., Chelminska, P., Juszkiewicz, J., & Kowalczewski, P. (2019).
Quality and nutritional/textural properties of durum wheat pasta enriched with
cricket powder. Foods, 8, 1–10.
D’Amico, S., Mäschle, J., Jekle, M., Tömösközi, S., Langó, B., & Schoenlechner, R.
(2015). Effect of high temperature drying on gluten-free pasta properties.
Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und -Technologie- Food Science and Technology, 63, 391–399.
Escuredo, O., González Martín, M. I., Wells Moncada, G., Fischer, S., & Hernández
Hierro, J. M. (2014). Amino acid profile of the quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.)
using near infrared spectroscopy and chemometric techniques. Journal of Cereal
Science, 60, 67–74.
Gopalakrishnan, J., Menon, R., Padmaja, G., Sajeev, M. S., & Moorthy, S. N. (2011).
Nutritional and functional characteristics of protein-fortified pasta from sweet
potato. Food and Nutrition Sciences, 2, 944–955.
Gull, A., Prasad, K., & Kumar, P. (2018). Nutritional, antioxidant, microstructural and
pasting properties of functional pasta. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural
Sciences, 17, 147–153.
Jane, J., Chen, Y. Y., Lee, L. F., McPherson, A. E., Wong, K. S., Radosavljevic, M., et al.
(1999). Effects of amylopectin branch chain length and amylose content on the
gelatinization and pasting properties of starch. Cereal Chemistry, 76, 629–637.
Kaur, G., Sharma, S., Nagi, H. P. S., & Ranote, P. S. (2013). Enrichment of pasta with
different plant proteins. Journal of Food Science & Technology, 50, 1000–1005.
Kim, Y., Kee, J. I., Lee, S., & Yoo, S. H. (2014). Quality improvement of rice noodle
restructured with rice protein isolate and transglutaminase. Food Chemistry, 145,
409–416.
Laleg, K., Barron, C., Santé-Lhoutellier, V., Walrand, S., & Micard, V. (2016). Protein
enriched pasta: Structure and digestibility of its protein network. Food and Function,
7, 1196–1207.
Lin, M., Han, P., Li, Y., Wang, W., Lai, D., & Zhou, L. (2019). Quinoa secondary
metabolites and Their biological activities or functions. Molecules, 24, 2512–2559.
López, D. N., Galante, M., Robson, M., Boeris, V., & Spelzini, D. (2018). Amaranth,
quinoa and chia protein isolates: Physicochemical and structural properties.
International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 109, 152–159.
Lu, X., Brennan, M. A., Serventi, L., Mason, S., & Brennan, C. S. (2016). How the
inclusion of mushroom powder can affect the physicochemical characteristics of
pasta. International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 51, 2433–2439.
Mahmoud, E. A. M., Nassef, S. L., & Basuny, A. M. M. (2012). Production of high protein
quality noodles using wheat flour fortified with different protein products from
lupine. Annals of Agricultural Science, 57, 105–112.
Mishra, P., & Bhatt, D. K. (2017). Development of quality characteristics of dried pasta
enriched with soya protein isolate powder. Journal of Environmental Science,
Toxicology and Food Technology, 11, 1–6.
Mohammed, I., Ahmed, A. R., & Senge, B. (2014). Effects of chickpea flour on wheat
pasting properties and bread making quality. Journal of Food Science & Technology,
51, 1902–1910.
Nilusha, R. A. T., Jayasinghe, J. M. J. K., Perera, O. D. A. N., & Perera, P. I. P. (2019).
Development of pasta products with nonconventional ingredients and their effect on
selected quality characteristics: A brief overview. International Journal of Food
Science, 6750726, 2019.
Nowak, V., Du, J., & Charrondière, U. R. (2015). Assessment of the nutritional
composition of quinoa ( Chenopodium quinoa willd .). Food Chemistry, 193, 47–54.
Oh, N. H., Seib, P., Ward, B., & Deyoe, C. W. (1985). Noodles IV. Influence of flour
protein, extraction rate, particle size, and starch damage on the quality
characteristics of dry noodles. Cereal Chemistry, 62, 441–446.
Phongthai, S., D’Amico, S., Schoenlechner, R., Homthawornchoo, W., & Rawdkuen, S.
(2017). Effects of protein enrichment on the properties of rice flour based gluten-free
pasta. Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und -Technologie- Food Science and Technology, 80,
378–385.
Ramya, N. S., Prabhasankar, P., Gowda, L. R., Modi, V. K., & Bhaskar, N. (2015).
Influence of freeze-dried shrimp meat in pasta processing qualities of Indian
T. durum wheat. Journal of Aquatic Food Product Technology, 24, 582–596.
Reddy Surasani, V. K., Singh, A., Gupta, A., & Sharma, S. (2019). Functionality and
cooking characteristics of pasta supplemented with protein isolate from pangas
processing waste. Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und -Technologie- Food Science and
Technology, 111, 443–448.
Sanni, S. A. (2012). Stability of iron-fortified gari during storage in different packaging
materials. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation, 36, 207–213.
Savita, S., Arshwinder, K., Gurkirat, K., & Vikas, N. (2013). Influence of different protein
sources on cooking and sensory quality of pasta. International Journal of Engineering,
3, 1757–1763.
Singh, J., McCarthy, O. J., & Singh, H. (2006). Physico-chemical and morphological
characteristics of New Zealand Taewa (Maori potato) starches. Carbohydrate
Polymers, 64, 569–581.
Tsakama, M., Mwangwela, A. M., Manani, T. A., & Mahungu, N. M. (2010).
Physicochemical and pasting properties of starch extracted from eleven sweetpotato
varieties. African Journal of Food Science and Technology, 1, 90–98.
UNAFPA. (2018). Estimate of world pasta production (tons). http://www.pasta-unafpa.
org/ingstatistics5.htm. (Accessed 14 April 2020).
Wójtowicz, A., & Mościcki, L. (2014). Influence of legume type and addition level on
quality characteristics, texture and microstructure of enriched precooked pasta.
Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und -Technologie- Food Science and Technology, 59,
1175–1185.
Wu, Y. V., Hareland, G. A., & Warner, K. (2001). Protein-enriched spaghetti fortified with
corn gluten meal. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 49, 3906–3910.
Yulianti, L. E., Sholichah, E., & Indrianti, N. (2019). Addition of tempeh flour as a protein
source in mixed flour (mocaf, rice, and corn) for pasta product. IOP Conference Series:
Earth and Environmental Science, 251, 012037-012045.