Role of Water in Pretzel Dough Development and Final Product Quality
K. Seetharaman,1,2 N. Yao,1 and M. K. Rout3
ABSTRACT
The relationship between flour quality or processing conditions and
pretzel quality has not been extensively investigated. The objective of this
study was to elucidate the role of water in pretzel dough development and
the consequent impact on pretzel integrity. Control pretzel and pretzels
made with lower or higher levels of added water in the dough were pro-
duced under standard processing conditions at Reading Bakery Systems’
pilot plant in Robesonia, PA. Dough samples were evaluated for their
appearance, moisture content, and extensibility and were viewed under a
microscope to evaluate the gluten network. Pretzels before and after the
kiln were evaluated for moisture content, pasting properties, and hardness
and were viewed under a microscope to evaluate the extent of starch gela-
Pretzels are a popular snack food. Researchers, however, have
not investigated the relationship between the processing parameters
of pretzel and the subsequent impact on quality under modern
processing conditions. Shollenberger and Marshall (1927) reported
on the influence of flour cultivars and the effects of chemical and
viscosity properties of flour on pretzel quality. They reported that
both high- and low-protein flours were unacceptable for pretzel
production, while straight and patent-grade flours containing 8–
10.5% protein were most satisfactory for pretzel making. This
study, however, does not translate to pretzel production under
modern production conditions that utilize high-speed extruders
and production operations.
Pretzel production is a simple process requiring few ingredients
including flour, oil, sugar, and yeast. During pretzel processing,
the dough is shaped by an extruder at relatively low pressures,
treated with hot-alkali solution, salted, and baked. The baking is
divided into two parts: a quick rapid initial bake at high tem-
perature, followed by a slow drying process at a lower temper-
ature. While the general effects of the cooking in a hot alkali bath
and baking and drying on pretzel quality are known (Groff 2001),
the specific influences of components on pretzel structure, and
thereby quality, have received little attention from researchers.
For example, a common quality issue encountered by the pretzel
industry is pretzel breakage wherein pretzels lack integrity after
baking. Pretzel industry experts and line operators can predict
pretzel breakage after baking by looking at the shaped dough
after low-pressure extrusion because shaped dough lacks integrity
and breaks after extrusion when picked off the conveyor belt.
Pretzel industry experts list several causes for this problem: addi-
tion of lower levels of water to the dough, higher extrusion pres-
sures (>80 psi), higher levels of yeast addition, and increased rest
time of the dough. After several preliminary experiments, we deter-
mined that higher extrusion pressure was more a symptom of
dough viscosity but not a cause of pretzel breakage in itself. Further-
more, we also determined that yeast level and rest time were
secondary factors that did not directly influence product quality.
Therefore, the objective of this study was to elucidate the role of
water in pretzel dough development and the mechanism by which
it affected pretzel integrity.
1 Assistant professor and graduate student, respectively, Department of Food Science,
Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802.
2 Corresponding author. Phone: 814-865-5644. Fax: 814-863-6132. E-mail:
Koushik@psu.edu
3 Dept. of Botany, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong.
Publication no. C-2004-0310-06R.
© 2004 American Association of Cereal Chemists, Inc.
336 CEREAL CHEMISTRY
Cereal Chem. 81(3):336–340
tinization. The structural and functional attributes of dough and pretzels
were significantly different for the three treatments. The degrees of gluten
development during mixing and starch gelatinization during baking were
influenced by the levels of water added and consequently influenced pretzel
quality. Pretzels made using low-water treatment were brittle due to a
lack of gluten development in the dough and inadequate starch gelatini-
zation during baking, while pretzels made using high water treatment were
unacceptable due to extensive gelatinization and retrogradation of starch.
Pretzel quality therefore appeared to be a function of appropriate gluten
development and starch gelatinization in the product.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Treatments and Pretzel Production
Control pretzel dough was produced by adding 7.65 kg (42.5%
water on flour basis) of water to 18 kg of flour, 0.45 kg of oil,
0.45 kg of sugar, and 0.05 kg of yeast. The dry ingredients were
mixed for 1 min in a Hobart mixer (model M802) before the addi-
tion of water and the mixture was further mixed for 4 min to form
the dough. The resulting dough was allowed to rest for 20 min
before extrusion and shaping. The low- and high-water doughs
were made under conditions similar those for control dough with
the exception of the amount of water added to the dough. The low-
water treatment and high-water treatment had 6.75 and 8.37 kg of
water added (37.5 and 46.5% water, flour wieght basis, respec-
tively). The levels of water added were selected based on the least
and highest amounts of water that could be added to make a
dough and produce pretzels. Furthermore, the lower level of water
was selected because it was identified by the industry as a level of
water addition that caused pretzel breakage.
Pretzels were made at the Reading Bakery Systems (RBS) pilot
plant at Robesonia, PA. The processing parameters for pretzel baking
are listed in Table I.
Flour Properties
Protein content of the flour was analyzed using a protein analyzer
(FP-528L, Leco Corp., St. Joseph, MI). A factor of 5.7 was used to
convert nitrogen content to wheat flour protein content. Moisture
content was determined by drying 1 g of flour at 130°C for 15 min
using a moisture analyzer (MB45, Ohaus Corp., Pine Brook, NJ).
Dough Properties
The farinograph properties of pretzel flour and pretzel formu-
lation, including water absorption, development time, stability,
and breakdown time were determined by using a Farinograph E
(C. W. Brabender Instruments, S. Hackensack, NJ) according the
Approved Method 54-21 using constant flour method in a 50-g
test bowl (AACC 2000).
TABLE I
Pretzel Processing Parameters
Temperature (°C) Time (min)
Cooker 88 0.5–1
Oven zone 1 254 4.4a
...
Oven zone 2 218
Kiln 112 14
a Baking time includes the time in both zones 1 and 2.
Pasting Properties
The pasting properties of pretzels before and after the kiln were
determined by using a Rapid Visco Analyzer (RVA) (Newport Sci-
entific, Warriewood, Australia). Pretzels were ground using a coffee
grinder (Braun model KSM2 (4), Naucalpan, Mexico) at full speed
for 1 min. Slurry (28 g, 14% db) of ground pretzels and water was
mixed at 960 rpm for 10 sec and the test was conducted at 160 rpm
using the preset protocol for extrusion without alcohol. The RVA
software was used to analyze peak, trough, final, breakdown, and
setback viscosities.
(w/v) (Evans 2002) on microscope slide then sealed with nail
polish after covering with a cover slip.
Statistical Analysis
All measurements were conducted at least twice. Data for texture
analysis is the average of more than 10 individual observations
for each treatment. Data were analyzed by using one-way analysis
of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s Studentized Range test
procedure using Statistical Analysis System v. 8.3 (SAS institute,
Cary, NC). Significance was defined at the 5% level.

Textural Properties RESULTS

The textural properties of extruded shaped dough and pretzels
before and after kiln were measured by using a texture analyzer
(TA.XT2i; Texture Technologies Corp., Scarsdale, NY/Stable Micro
Systems, Godalming, Surrey, UK). Extruded dough (10 pieces, 2 g
each) and 15 pretzel samples before or after the kiln were randomly
selected from each treatment and tested according to settings listed
in Table II. Data reported are the average of 10 values for the
dough samples and 15 values for the pretzel samples.
Confocal Microscopy of Dough
Observations of dough gluten structure were made using laser
scanning confocal microscopy (Olympus FV-300, Hitech Instru-
ments, Edgemont, PA). Samples stained with fluorescein (Sigma,
St. Louis, MO) were excited with a blue argon ion laser (488 nm)
and images were collected through a 510 LP and 530 SP filter. DIC
transmitted light images were collected simultaneously. Fluorescein
solution (1 mg/mL in 70% ethanol) diluted 100× was used to soak
a small piece of dough cut by surgical blade. The dough piece was
allowed to stand for 10 min then washed 3× with distilled water to
remove excess dye and observed with the confocal microscope.
Polarized Light Microscopy of Pretzel
Starch granule morphology and degree of starch gelatinization
were observed by using a polarized light microscope. Ground pretzel
samples of control, low-, or high-water formula pretzels were viewed
by using a light microscope equipped with polarizing filters (BX
50, Olympus, New York, NY) connected to a digital camera (SPOT
II Bioscan, Pittsburg, PA). Images were captured by autoexposure.
A small amount of pretzel powder was dispersed with 0.08% (w/v)
I2 (diluted from stock solution of 0.2% I2 and 2.0% KI in water
TABLE II
Test Settings for Texture Analysis of Dough and Pretzelsa
Pretzel Dough Force Pretzel
Probe TA-96 Double Clamp TA-41 Knife Blade
Probe ending point Return to start Return to start
Pretest speed (mm/sec) 2.0 10
Test speed (mm/sec) 3.3 1
Post speed (mm/sec) 10.0 10
Test time (sec) na na
Probe distance (mm) 40.0 3
Trig force (g) 5 5
a When measured with a TA.XT2i texture analyzer.
The pretzel industry generally recognizes that the addition of
lower amounts of water to dough results in pretzel breakage.
Therefore, in this study, we evaluated the functional properties of
dough and pretzels made using higher or lower levels of added
water in the dough compared with the standard (control) formu-
lation. Key differences between the products were identified using
a variety of analytical tools to understand the causes of pretzel
breakage. The observations also helped define the optimal struc-
tural attributes required for good quality pretzels.
Dough Characterization
Visually, the shaped control dough had a shiny white appear-
ance, rounded edges, and the dough piece retained its integrity
when picked up from the conveyor belt. In contrast, the low-water
dough had a dull grayish appearance with tiny cracks visible on
the surface and the dough lacked integrity when picked off the
conveyor belt. The high-water dough, on the other hand, was
elastic and did not break when picked off the conveyor belt. The
high-water dough did not retain its shape after extrusion, resulting
in a flattened product that was not desired.
Pretzel flour used in this study had a protein content of 9.1%
and moisture content of 11.2%. The farinograph curves for the
pretzel flour, control dough formulation, and dough formulations
made with low or high levels of added water are shown in Fig. 1.
The water absorption of the flour was 55.9% based on a 500 FU
consistency. The water added to all three dough formulations was
lower compared to water required for the flour gluten to be fully
developed. Thus, pretzel doughs are typically developed under
limiting water conditions, resulting in suboptimal gluten devel-
opment. Furthermore, gluten formation is even more limited in
the low-water dough, thus affecting the functionality of this dough.
This observation was further supported by confocal microscopic
observations of the gluten network of the three dough formulations

TABLE III
Moisture Contents of Extruded Dough and of Pretzels
Before and After Kiln

Added Dough Pretzel Moisture (%)

Formulation a
Water (%) Moisture (%) Before Kiln After Kiln
Low-water 37.5 28.93bb 8.19b 4.52a
Control 42.5 31.29a 9.32a 4.45a
High-water 46.5 38.66c 11.05c 7.04b
a Based on flour (%).
b Values followed by the same letter in the same column are not significantly Fig. 1. Farinograms of pretzel flour, low-water, control, and high-water
different (P < 0.05). formula doughs (% water, flour basis).

Vol. 81, No. 3, 2004 337

(Fig. 2). The fibrils of the gluten network were visible in the control zels made using low-water addition were not as swollen, showing
dough and the high-water dough formulations, whereas the gluten a higher proportion of ungelatinized starch granules (arrows in
network did not have a continuous structure in the low-water Fig. 6A). On the other hand, pretzels made using high-water addition
dough. Similar observations have been reported for pasta dough, were the most swollen and almost no ungelatinized granules were
which is also typically extruded under limiting water conditions observed.
(Matsuo et al 1978).
The extensibility of the three dough samples was also signi- DISCUSSION
ficantly different as measured by using a TA.XT2i (Fig. 3). The
low-water dough was not extensible and broke, while the control The physicochemical characteristics that define pretzels and the
and high-water doughs retained their extensibility throughout the impact of water on dough development and pretzel quality have
test time. The limited gluten formation and the absence of gluten not been investigated before. This study aims to understand the
network in the low-water pretzel dough contributed to its decreased impact of water on pretzel dough properties and gluten network for-
extensibility. This observation is supported by results obtained from mation. The study further explores the subsequent impact of moisture
confocal microscopy. content in dough on pretzel quality by documenting changes that
occur in starch matrix as influenced by baking. These obser-
Pretzel Characterization vations will aid the industry in improving pretzel quality, as well
Pretzel samples were characterized by using rapid viscosity anal- in quality assurance to consistently produce good quality pretzels.
ysis, texture analyses, and microscopic techniques after baking but Gluten development in dough was significantly influenced by
before the kiln, and at the end of the kiln (final product). The interior the water content in the formulation. In typical bread doughs, the
cross-section of control baked pretzels appeared white and opaque, level of water added is determined based on the flour water absorp-
while pretzels made with either low-water or high-water had dull tion measured using the farinograph or similar tools. In pretzel
color and a glassy interior cross-section. dough, the level of water in the formulation was significantly lower
The moisture contents of extruded dough and pretzels before than that determined for the flour using a farinograph (Fig. 1).
and after the kiln are listed in Table III. When measured before Thus, gluten development in pretzel dough would be limited by the
the kiln, the moisture content of low-water pretzels was lowest and lower level of water added compared with that required for the
high-water pretzels were highest. The moisture content of the flour from which the dough is made. Matsuo et al (1978) reported
finished product was higher in high-water pretzels compared with that the protein matrix in pasta dough became more ordered as the
the other two treatments. Roughly the same amount of moisture dough approached the end of the extruder augur without achieving
(≈70.5%) was removed from the dough during baking for all three
treatments. However, the proportion of moisture removed from
the half-baked products during drying in the kiln was significantly
different. About 52.3% of the moisture was removed from the control
product; 44.8% was removed from the low-water pretzel; and
only 36.3% was removed from the high-water pretzels.
Pretzels sampled before and after the kiln exhibited signi-
ficantly different (P < 0.05) pasting properties when measured by
using RVA (Fig. 4). Low-water pretzels sampled before the kiln
had higher pasting properties compared with control pretzels sam-
pled before the kiln, while the reverse trend was observed in pretzels
sampled at the end of the kiln. High-water pretzels had the lowest
pasting properties when sampled before or after the kiln.
The force required to break pretzel samples before and after the
kiln are shown in Fig. 5 (P < 0.001). The force required to break
low-water pretzels was highest before the kiln and lowest after the
kiln, while the force required breaking high-water pretzels exhibited
the opposite trend.
Observations of pretzel samples under polarized light microscopy
reveal different degrees of starch swelling and gelatinization as
shown in Fig. 6. Starch granules in control pretzels were swollen Fig. 3. Dough extensibility of low-water, control and high-water extruded
and partially gelatinized. In contrast, starch granules in the pret- dough samples. Data reported average of 10 values for dough samples.

Fig. 2. Confocal microscopy of low-water (A), control (B), and high-water (C) pretzel doughs. Gluten network formation in control and high-water
pretzel doughs indicated by arrows.

338 CEREAL CHEMISTRY

a continuous network of protein sheets and fibrils, suggesting a
lack of optimal gluten development. The amount of water added
to control pretzel dough and the subsequent mixing time of 4 min
is well suited for the required gluten development and functionality
to produce good quality pretzels with desired texture. However, if
the amount of water added was lower than that for control dough,
then gluten development was minimal (Fig. 2A), resulting in a
dough that lacked desired extensibility after shaping. Dough with
higher levels of water added had good gluten development but
flowed easily through the extruder and did not maintain the desired
shape after extrusion. Thus optimal gluten functionality is desired
in pretzel doughs to provide the necessary elasticity needed to
maintain the integrity of the shaped dough piece.
Based on the loss of moisture in the baking oven and the kiln, it
is evident that the extent of starch gelatinization in the oven, the
degree of annealing/retrogradation in the kiln and the subsequent
amount of water held by the matrix was significantly different for
the three treatments. The rapid loss of moisture from the low-
water dough probably minimized starch swelling and gelatinization,
while the higher moisture levels present in the high-water dough
potentially facilitated starch swelling and gelatinization during
the baking operation. This observation was further supported by
data from microscopy and pasting properties. The results from
Fig. 4. Pasting properties of low-water, control, and high-water pretzels
before and after kiln (P < 0.05). Data reported average of two replicates.
Fig. 5. Peak cutting force of low-water, control, and high-water pretzels
before and after kiln (P < 0.001). Data reported average of 15 replicates
pretzel samples.
microscopy of low-water pretzels showed starch granules that
have minimal swelling compared with that observed in control or
high-water pretzels (Fig. 6A). The peak viscosity of pretzels made
using low-water dough was higher before drying in the kiln, while
the peak viscosity was lower after the drying operation compared
with control pretzels. In contrast, starch granules in pretzels made
using the high-water dough were swollen and gelatinized (Fig.
6C), and their peak viscosities were the lowest when measured by
using the RVA. It is likely that the gelatinized or partially gela-
tinized granules retrograded, while the ungelatinized partially
swollen starch granules annealed during the baking process, thus
influencing viscosity development in the RVA. The degree of
starch swelling and gelatinization possibly also contributed to the
internal matrix of the pretzels. Data on the force required to break
pretzels using a texture analyzer showed that pretzels made using
the low-water dough required less force to break after baking and
Fig. 6. Polarized light microscopy (10× magnification) of low-water (A),
control (B), and high-water (C) pretzels. Arrows indicate ungelatinized
starches in low-water pretzel.
Vol. 81, No. 3, 2004 339
drying. This was probably due to limited gluten development in
the dough and the subsequent limited contribution of gelatinized
starch in setting the internal matrix. Pretzels made using high-
water dough, on the other hand, required greater force to break
after baking and drying, probably due to a stronger gluten matrix
in the dough and the gelatinized and retrograded starch matrix
established during baking and drying. Therefore, the overall quality
of pretzels appear to be related to the level of water added and its
consequent impact on the gluten development during dough mixing
and extrusion, and the subsequent rate of moisture removal during
the baking process which affects starch swelling and gelatinization.
Therefore, an optimal balance between gluten and starch func-
tionality is desired for pretzels of good quality. When less water
was added to the dough, gluten development was limited; starch
appeared to anneal and form a glassy matrix, resulting in a pretzel
that was brittle. In contrast, while gluten development was better in
doughs with high levels of added water, the extent of starch gelatin-
ization was also higher in the pretzels, resulting in a harder, more
unacceptable pretzel with a retrograded starch matrix. Further studies
are underway to determine the influence of flour properties on
pretzel quality.
[Received May 5, 2003. Accepted November 17, 2003.]
340 CEREAL CHEMISTRY
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture for the grant that
supported this research (contract no. ME442307) and also the Snack Food
Association for partial funding in support of this project. We also thank
Terry Groff, President, Reading Bakery System, Inc., and the staff for assis-
tance and the use of the pilot plant for this research project.
LITERATURE CITED
American Association of Cereal Chemists. 2000. Approved Methods of
the AACC, 10th Ed. Method 54-21. The Association: St. Paul, MN.
Evans, A. 2002. Resistant starch from four native high-amylose maize
starches. M.S. thesis. The Penn State University: University Park, PA.
Groff, E. T. 2001. Perfect pretzel production. Pages 369-383 in: Snack
Foods Processing. E. W. Lusas and L. W. Rooney, eds. Technomic
Publishing: Lancaster, PA.
Matsuo, R. R., Dexter, J. E., and Dronzek, B. L. 1978. Scanning electron
microscopy study of spaghetti processing. Cereal Chem. 55:744-753.
Seetharaman, K., Yao, N., and Groff, T. 2002. Quality assurance for hard
pretzel production. Cereal Foods World 47:361-364.
Shollenberger, J. H., and Marshall, W. K. 1927. Flour for pretzels. USDA
Tech. Bull. 46:1-16.