23
Universidad de Sonora
ISSN: 1665-1456
23
Volume XXV, Issue 2
Journal of biological and health sciences
http://biotecnia.unison.mx
Eect of processing conditions on the functional properties
of aquafaba from natural chickpeas:
valorization of a food waste
Efecto de las condiciones de procesamiento sobre las propiedades funcionales de la aquafaba de
garbanzos naturales: valorización de un residuo alimentario
Angelica Thomas-Medaa, Gilber Vela-Gutiérreza, Olga Luisa Tavanob, Veymar G. Tacias-Pascacioa, *
a Faculty of Nutrition and Food Sciences, University of Sciences and Arts of Chiapas, Lib. Norte Pte. , Tuxtla
Gutierrez, Chiapas, Mexico.
b Faculty of Nutrition, Alfenas Federal Univ., Gabriel Monteiro da Silva St, Alfenas, MG -, Brazil
Correspondence author: Veymar G. Tacias-Pascacio
e-mail: veymar.tacias@unicach.mx
Received: 31 de agosto del 2022
Accepted: 15 de diciembre de 2022
ABSTRACT
Chickpea cooking water (aquafaba) is currently being widely
investigated as an egg substitute due to its excellent func-
tional properties, which can vary for various reasons, includ-
ing processing conditions employed during canning. There is
little information regarding the behavior of such properties
in aquafaba obtained from natural chickpeas (not canned).
For this reason, the objective of this paper was to study the
eect of operational conditions on foam capacity (FC) and
stability (FS) of aquafaba from natural chickpeas. Dierent
ranges of cooking time, temperature, and chickpea to water
ratio were evaluated. The results were compared with the FC
and FS of egg white and canned aquafaba. It was found that
a chickpea to water ratio of 1:2, cooking temperature of 98 ±
2 °C and cooking time of 60 min, generated aquafaba with a
FC and FS of 370 ± 14.14 % and 82.78 ± 3.1 %, respectively.
The obtained aquafaba presented a lower FC and FS than
egg white and lower FC and similar FS than canned aquafa-
ba. Obtaining aquafaba for use in the food industry is aligned
with current eorts to recover food waste.
Key words: egg replacer, foam capacity, foam stability, chick-
peas
RESUMEN
El agua de cocción de garbanzos (aquafaba) se está inves-
tigando ampliamente como sustituto del huevo debido
a sus excelentes propiedades funcionales que varían por
diversas razones, incluidas las condiciones de procesamien-
to empleadas durante el enlatado. Hay poca información
sobre el comportamiento de tales propiedades en aquafaba
obtenida de garbanzos naturales (no enlatados). Por esta
razón, el objetivo de este trabajo fue estudiar el efecto de las
condiciones de operación sobre la capacidad de formación
(FC) y la estabilidad (FS) de espuma de aquafaba a partir de
garbanzos naturales. Se evaluaron diferentes rangos de tiem-
po y temperatura de cocción y relación garbanzo/agua. Los
resultados se compararon con la FC y FS de clara de huevo
y aquafaba enlatada. Se encontró que una relación garban-
zo:agua de 1:2, temperatura de cocción de 98 ± 2 °C y tiempo
de cocción de 60 min, generan aquafaba con FC y FS de 370
± 14.14 % y 82.78 ± 3.1 %, respectivamente. El aquafaba
obtenida presentó FC y FS inferiores a la clara de huevo y FC
inferior y FS similar que la aquafaba enlatada. La obtención
de aquafaba para su uso en la industria alimentaria, se alinea
con los esfuerzos actuales de valorización de desperdicios
alimentarios.
Palabras clave: sustituto de huevo, capacidad de espuma,
estabilidad de espuma, garbanzos
INTRODUCTION
Proteins are compounds which are of special interest for food
industry due to their bioactive, nutritional and functional pro-
perties (Lafarga et al., 2019a). Proteins from animal sources
have been traditionally used in the food industry to obtain
edible foams and emulsions; however, it is known that 6 kg of
vegetable protein are required to produce 1 kg of animal pro-
tein, which has led to large-scale animal protein production
being considered one of the main causes of environmental
problems (Aiking, 2014; Lafarga et al., 2019a). Among animal
proteins, egg white proteins are extensively used due to
their excellent functional properties such as foam formation,
emulsication and stabilization (Herald et al., 2008; Lin et al.,
2017; Aslan and Erta, 2020); however, these proteins are
strongly associated with food allergies, especially in young
children and infants (Caubet and Wang, 2011; Park et al., 2017;
Meurer et al., 2020; Alsalman et al., 2020a; Włodarczyk et al.,
2022). In addition to egg allergy, the increased awareness of
healthiness and sustainability of the modern consumer and
food industry, together with an increase in the proportion of
vegan people (Arozarena et al., 2001; Boye et al., 2010; Jans-
sen et al., 2016; Asioli et al., 2017; Lin et al., 2017; McClements
et al., 2017; Sharif et al., 2018; Aschemann-Witzel and Peschel,
2019; Buhl et al., 2019;), have motivated a growing interest
for plant-based proteins, mainly of soy, peas and chickpeas,
as possible candidates to replace animal-based proteins
(Sharif et al., 2018; He et al., 2019; Kim et al., 2022; Silva et al.,
2022), because they have functional properties such as water
holding capacity, fat binding, solubility as well as foaming,
gelling, and emulsifying capacities, which are comparable
with proteins from animal and dairy sources (Boye et al.,
2010; Ma et al., 2016; Sharif et al., 2018; Sharima-Abdullah et
DOI: 10.18633/biotecnia.v25i2.1837
24 Volume XXV, Issue 2
24
Thomas-Meda et al: Biotecnia / XXV (2): 23-29 (2023)
al., 2018; Bessada et al., 2019), but with the advantages of
low allergenicity, sustainable production, high production
volumes and low price (Papalamprou et al., 2010; Gumus et
al., 2017; Buhl et al., 2019; Lafarga et al., 2019a).
Recently, it was discovered that aquafaba, the viscous
liquid resulting from cooking chickpea seed or other legu-
mes in water, or that found in canned products of the same
origin (Mustafa and Reaney, 2020; Aslan and Erta, 2021), is
a valuable food resource due to its high content in protein
and health-promoting compounds such as saponins and po-
lyphenols (Damian et al., 2018; Huang et al., 2018; Lafarga et
al., 2019a; Lafarga et al., 2019b). Aquafaba from chickpeas has
been gaining popularity since 2014 due to its having showed
to be a useful thickener, emulsier and foaming agent in va-
rious formulations such as mayonnaise, meringues, cheeses
and cakes (He et al., 2019; Alsalman et al., 2020a; Meurer et
al., 2020; Raikos et al., 2020; He et al., 2021b; Muhialdin et al.,
2021; Nguyen and Tran, 2021).
It has been reported that aquafaba contains approxima-
tely 94 % of water, 1.5 % of protein, 0.5 % of ash and 4 % of
carbohydrates (Mustafa et al., 2018; Serventi et al., 2018; Shim
et al., 2018; Stantiall et al., 2018; Alsalman et al., 2020b); howe-
ver, the chemical composition and functional properties of
aquafaba, can vary depending on factors such as chickpea
composition and genotype, processing methods, processing
auxiliary agents (Mustafa and Reaney, 2020) and operational
conditions.
Based on the aforementioned, the objective of this
paper was to study the eect of operational conditions
(cooking temperature, cooking time and solid to liquid ratio)
on functional (foam capacity and stability) properties of
aquafaba from natural chickpea. In addition, the functional
properties of the aquafaba obtained were compared against
egg white proteins and canned aquafaba properties.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Materials
Dried Mexican Kabuli chickpeas were purchased from a local
supermarket located in the city of Tuxtla Gutiérrez, Chiapas
(México). Chickpeas were stored at room temperature until
their use. Canned Kabuli chickpeas and fresh egg whites
were also purchased from the same store and were used for
comparison.
Raw material pretreatment
Chickpeas were subjected to a manual cleaning and washing
in order to remove some impurities such as stones, insects
and rotten grains. After that, clean chickpeas were soaked in
tap water for 24 h at a chickpeas to water ratio of 1:2 (w/v).
Then, soaking water was drained and discarded, and the
chickpeas obtained were used in the next experiments.
Aquafaba production
One hundred grams of cleaned and soaked chickpeas were
placed in a sealed glass jar, then mixed with distilled water at
dierent chickpeas to water ratios (CWR) and cooked for di-
erent times and temperatures according to the monofactor
test experiments. After cooking, the aquafaba obtained was
drained from cooked chickpea grains using a stainless-steel
strainer, and then stored under refrigeration at 4 °C for 24
h. Prior to analysis the aquafaba was allowed to cool down
to room temperature. Aquafaba was analyzed in terms of
its foaming capacity and foam stability, and compared with
canned samples.
Monofactor test
In order to study the eect of operational conditions on
functional properties of aquafaba, cooking temperature,
cooking time and CWR were evaluated by monofactor test. In
this sense, two variables were kept constant at their respec-
tive central test range values and the other variable varied
within its experimental ranges. The variables studied were
cooking temperature (60 to 98 ± 2 °C), cooking time (20-100
min) and CWR (1:1 to 1:5). All experiments were performed
in triplicate.
Foaming capacity and foam stability
Foaming capacity (FC) and foam stability (FS) were determi-
ned according to Shim et al. (2018); briey, 50 mL of sample
(natural aquafaba, canned aquafaba or egg white) was
placed in a 14 cm diameter bowl. The sample was shaken at
maximum speed with a Hamilton Beach hand mixer (model
62647), for 2 min. After that, the obtained foam was placed
in a 500 mL graduate cylinder. Measurements of the foam
volumes of the whipped samples were made at time 0 (VF0)
and after 30 min (VF30), and the FC and FS were calculated
according to the equations (1) and (2), respectively (Mustafa
et al., 2018).
(1)
% =
0
×100
% =
30
0
×100
(2)
Analysis of the aquafaba physicochemical properties
Aquafaba was analyzed in terms of the following physi-
cochemical properties. pH (981.12) and density (962.37)
were determined according to AOAC standard methods
(AOAC, 1990). Protein concentration was determined by the
Bradford dye binding method, using bovine serum albumin
as the reference and recording the absorbance at 595 nm
(Bradford, 1976). Starch content was measured qualitatively
by Starch-Iodine Complex method reported by Street (1974);
the sample was allowed to act on an amylose solution for 15
min, and then the blue color formed by adding iodine-iodide
solution was compared with the color of an amylase free
control, using a spectrophotometer at 578 nm (Street, 1974).
Determination of total polyphenol content
Total polyphenol content was determined by the Folin–Cio-
calteu method, performed as described by Lu et al. (2018).
One mL of Folin–Ciocalteu reagent was added into 0.3 mL
of polyphenol solution and mixed for 5 min. Then, 5 mL of
25
Volume XXV, Issue 2 25
Thomas-Meda et al: E ect of processing conditions on the functional properties / XXV (2): 23-29 (2023)
sodium carbonate (10 %) was added and oscillated for 3
min. After that, 20 mL of distilled water were added, and the
mixture was incubated at room temperature for 2 h. Finally,
absorbance of the solution was measured at 765 nm using an
ultraviolet-visible spectrophotometer (VE-5100UV, Cientí ca
Vela Quin, México). Gallic acid was used as standard.
Antioxidant activity measured by ABTS method
Antioxidant activity was determined by ABTS [(2,2’-azino-bis
(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid)] method accor-
ding to the reported by Cai et al. (2015). Brie y, potassium
persulphate (2.45 mM) and ABTS stock solution (7 mM)
were mixed and left in the dark at room temperature for 16
h, to produce the ABTS radical cation. Prior to the analysis,
the ABTS radical solution was diluted in 10 mM phosphate
bu ered saline (pH 7.4) to an absorbance of 0.8 ± 0.1 at 734
nm. After that, 1 mL of diluted ABTS radical solution and 1mL
of sample were mixed, and ten minutes later the absorbance
was measured at 734 nm against the corresponding blank,
and using TROLOX (Sigma Aldrich) as standard. The ABTS sca-
venging activity of samples was calculated using equation 3
(Cai et al., 2015).
(3)
where A1 is the absorbance of the control and A2 is the
absorbance of the sample.
Statistical analysis
All statistical analyses were performed using Minitab® statis-
tical software version 16.0 for windows. Mean comparisons
were made by analysis of variance (ANOVA) with a signi can-
ce level of p < 0.05. All experiments were performed in tripli-
cate and data are presented as mean ± standard deviation.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
E ect of processing conditions on functional properties
of aquafaba
The e ect of the variables cooking temperature, cooking
time and CWR on functional properties of aquafaba (foaming
capacity and foam stability) from natural chickpeas were stu-
died by monofactor test. Chickpeas to water ratio (w/v) was
studied in a range from 1:1 to 1:5; in this case, the variables
cooking temperature and cooking time were maintained at
98 ± 2 °C and 60 min, respectively. As it can be seen in Figure
1(a), the best CWR for both foaming capacity and foam sta-
bility was 1:2, while an increase in the amount of water ne-
gatively a ected the functional properties of the aquafaba.
Similar results were obtained by Serventi et al. (2018), who
boiled chickpeas seed in water with 1:1.75 of chickpeas to
water ratio for 90 min (Serventi et al., 2018). This can be due
to that an excessive amount of water in mixture from higher
ratios (1:4 and 1:5, mainly) which would inevitably lower the
concentration of proteins and carbohydrates, that are the
main responsibles for the aquafaba functional properties
(Mustafa et al., 2018; Shim et al., 2018). In fact, a negative
Figure 1. E ect of variables a) chickpeas to water ratio, b) cooking tempera-
ture and c) cooking time on foaming capacity and stability of aquafaba.
Results were expressed as the mean value ± standard deviation. Di erent
letters between treatments indicate statistical signi cant di erences (p <
0.05).
Figura 1. Efecto de las variables a) relación garbanzos:agua, b) tempera-
tura de cocción y c) tiempo de cocción sobre la capacidad y estabilidad
de espuma de aquafaba. Los resultados se expresaron como promedio ±
desviación estándar. Letras diferentes entre tratamientos indican diferen-
cias estadísticas signi cativas (p < 0.05).
correlation between CWR and protein concentration was
reported, indicating that the protein content of the aquafaba
obtained boiling the chickpeas at a lower CWR had a higher
protein concentration (Lafarga et al., 2019a). The foaming
ability of most plant proteins increases with low degrees of
hydrolysis and high concentrations of proteins in solution. As
demonstrated by Patino et al. (2008), this ability tends to a
maximum when the air–water interface is saturated by the
protein (Patino et al., 2008).
The results of the e ect of the cooking temperature on
the functional properties of aquafaba are presented in Figure
a)
b)
c)
Foaming Capacity Foam Stability
Foaming Capacity Foam Stability
Foaming Capacity Foam Stability
26 Volume XXV, Issue 2
26
Thomas-Meda et al: Biotecnia / XXV (2): 23-29 (2023)
1(b). In this case, the CWR and the cooking time were kept
at 1:2 and 60 min, respectively. As can be seen in Figure 1(b),
temperature plays an important role in the foam capacity
and foam stability of the aquafaba. An increase in the value
of this variable from 60 °C to 98 ± 2 °C, improves the functio-
nal properties of the product. This behavior can be explained
taking into account that high temperature treatment during
cooking leads to hydration and denaturation of proteins, ge-
latinization of starch, solubilization, depolymerization and/or
loss of pectic polysaccharides from the cell wall. Therefore,
during cooking, the outer cell layers of the seed coat become
a selective membrane that controls the di usion of mole-
cules from the seed to the cooking water; thus, exposure to
higher temperatures can cause disruption of the seed coat
and greater transfer of undissolved materials to the cooking
water, giving it better functional properties (He et al., 2021a).
Figure 1(c) shows the results for cooking time; this va-
riable was studied in a range from 20 to 100 min, where CWR
and cooking temperature were maintained at 1:2 and 98 ± 2
°C, respectively. As it can be observed, an increase in FC and
FS was found when the cooking time increased from 20 to
60 min; however, after this time functional property values
were not signi cantly improved. This may be due to the fact
that in 60 min the greatest possible quantity (under the eva-
luated conditions) of compounds of interest that confer its
functional properties to aquafaba have been leached from
the chickpea to the cooking water, so prolonging cooking
time does not promote the release of more compounds. In
addition, it has been reported that, in general, long cooking
times can cause protein denaturation, and thereby a ect the
functional properties of aquafaba (He et al., 2021a).
Based on the results of monofactor tests, the conditions
selected for the production of aquafaba were CWR of 1:2,
cooking temperature of 98 ± 2 °C and cooking time of 60 min.
The aquafaba produced under these conditions presented a
foaming capacity and stability of 370 ± 14.14 % and 82.78
± 3.1 %, respectively, which is very close to the reported by
Mustafa et al. (2018), who found a foaming capacity and sta-
bility ranged between 182 to 476 % and 77 to 92 %, respec-
tively (Mustafa et al., 2018). Functional properties of natural
aquafaba were compared with the functional properties of
canned aquafaba and egg white, as it can be seen in Figure
2. As expected, the egg white presents the best functional
properties (foam capacity and stability) due to its proteins,
such as ovoalbumin, ovotransferrin, lysozym, ovomucoid,
and ovomucin, and their interactions with each other that are
particularly capable of keeping the foam formed (Bovšková
and Míková, 2011). These results are in accordance with Buhl
et al. (2022) and Stantiall et al. (2018), who nd that foam
prepared by fresh egg has signi cant higher foam capacity
than natural aquafaba of chickpeas.
In the case of the aquafaba produced in this work (na-
tural aquafaba) compared to the canned aquafaba, it was
found that the latter has a better foam capacity; this can be
explained considering the di erences in industrial canning
procedures (cooking conditions such as pressure, tempera-
Figure 2. Comparison of the functional properties of aquafaba obtained
from natural chickpeas, canned aquafaba and egg white. Results were ex-
pressed as the mean value ± standard deviation. Di erent letters between
treatments indicate statistical signi cant di erences (p<0.05).
Figura 2. Comparación de las propiedades funcionales de aquafaba obte-
nida a partir de garbanzos naturales, aquafaba enlatada y clara de huevo.
Los resultados se expresaron como promedio ± desviación estándar. Letras
diferentes entre tratamientos indican diferencias estadísticas signi cativas
(p < 0.05).
ture, time, etc.) (He et al., 2021c; Alsalman and Ramaswamy,
2021; Alsalman et al., 2022), the use of additives, such as salt
and preservatives, and genetic di erences among cultivars
used by manufacturers which can result in changes in aqua-
faba composition and its functional properties (Mustafa et
al., 2018). Interestingly, no statistically signi cant di erences
(p>0.05) were found between foam stability of natural aqua-
faba and canned aquafaba. This may be due to the fact that
both natural aquafaba and canned aquafaba have a similar
content of protein (albumins, mainly) (Mustafa et al., 2018;
Buhl et al., 2019) (as it can be seen in Table 1), which are
surface-active agent (Shim et al., 2018) and that they were
whipped for the same time. Whipping of this protein solution
promotes the incorporation of air into the solution, which
leads to bubble formation and adsorption of proteins at the
gas-liquid interface to form protein-encapsulated bubbles.
The shear force involved in whipping causes denaturation
and coagulation of proteins on the air cell surfaces, increa-
sing foam rigidity and stability (Mustafa et al., 2018). Similar
results were reported by Mustafa et al. (2018), who studied
aquafaba from di erent brands of canned chickpeas. Among
their results, they found that, for example, brands A and B
presented a foam capacity of 182.22 and 288.89 %, respecti-
vely, with a statistically signi cant di erence between them;
however, for foam stability, these aquafaba presented values
of 77.2 and 77.5 %, for A and B, respectively, without signi -
cant statistical di erences.
Analysis of the aquafaba
The natural aquafaba prepared in this work and the aquafaba
from canned chickpeas were compared in terms of some of
their physicochemical properties. As it can be seen in Table
1, no statistically signi cant di erences (p>0.05) were found
in protein content between natural aquafaba and canned
aquafaba, and these results are consistent with the ndings
Foaming Capacity Foam Stability
27
Volume XXV, Issue 2 27
Thomas-Meda et al: Eect of processing conditions on the functional properties / XXV (2): 23-29 (2023)
of Włodarczyk et al. (2022), Buhl et al. (2019), Mustafa et al.
(2018) and Stantiall et al. (2018), who reported a protein con-
centration of 1.26, 1.3, 1.5 and 0.95 % of aquafaba, respecti-
vely. As mentioned above, the similar protein content bet-
ween natural aquafaba and canned aquafaba could explain
the similar behavior in the stability of the foam formed by
both samples of aquafaba. Similarly, no signicant statistical
dierences (p > 0.05) were found between the density values
of the two samples studied, and such values are similar to
those reported by Mustafa et al. (2018).
On the other hand, concerning starch, no presence of
this compound was found in canned aquafaba, a result that
is consistent with other reports (Damian et al., 2018; Stantiall
et al., 2018). However, in natural aquafaba the presence of
starch was found, and this may be due to less drastic pro-
cessing conditions than those used in other studies, such
as the use of high pressures, which together with a high
temperature, can lead to degradation of this polysaccharide
(Guha and Zakiuddin, 2002). Regarding the pH, it was found
that the canned aquafaba presented a higher pH (5.85) than
natural aquafaba (5.15) obtained in this work, which may be
due, as previously mentioned, to the various dierences in
cooking time, cooking temperature, addition of salts and
preservatives, pressure during cooking, chickpea cultivar
and genotype, chickpea to water ratio (He et al., 2021a; Erem
et al., 2021). It is important to mention that, the dierences
in pH between both samples can explain the dierent foam
capacities found in them, which, as already shown in the
corresponding section, was higher in canned aquafaba than
in natural aquafaba, and this is due to the fact that pH had
a negative eect on foaming capacity, that is, an increase in
this parameter will cause a decrease on foaming capacity.
This is because the pH modies the net charge of the protein,
which aects foam formation and, in general, its viscoelastic
properties (Lafarga et al., 2019a).
Finally, the antioxidant activity and total phenol con-
tent of natural aquafaba was statistically higher than that
of canned aquafaba (p > 0.05), and this may be due to the
conditions and processing steps used in the canned aquafa-
ba aecting these properties to a greater extent. It has been
reported that the canning procedure includes soaking (25 °C
12 h), bleaching (85 °C 30 min), canning in salt water (1.3 %
salt and 1.6 % sugar) and nal heating (121 °C 14 min) (Erem
et al., 2021), which is dierent from the process used in this
work. In addition, it is important to note that, although there
are about twice as many polyphenolic compounds in natural
aquafaba compared to canned aquafaba, in both cases the
levels are low. This can be favorable for the physicochemical
properties of the material. The presence of phenolic com-
pounds solubilized in aquafaba, although it can add bio-
functional properties, can reduce the foaming properties of
the proteins present. This is because the ability of proteins
to interact with the aqueous interface can be reduced when
blocked by phenolic compounds that preferentially integrate
with them, as observed by Fernando and Manthey (2002) in
an assay with black bean soluble components (Fernando and
Manthey, 2022).
CONCLUSION
The functional properties of the aquafaba produced from
natural chickpeas are inuenced by the process variables,
in such a way that the increase in temperature and cooking
time and the decrease in the CWR increase both the capa-
city and the foam stability. In this way, it is possible to nd
operating conditions that generate aquafaba with functional
properties similar to that of canned aquafaba, and with the
potential, through optimization of operating conditions, to
be compared with the functional properties of egg white. In
addition, regardless of whether it is aquafaba produced from
natural chickpeas or canned aquafaba, this product presents
antioxidant activity derived from the presence of bioactive
compounds, such as phenolic compounds, which are extre-
mely valuable in various industries.
This study reinforced the need to add value to grain
cooking water, previously seen as a waste material, but which
may contain bio-functional value and be of great interest in
the technological aspect of its application. The production
conditions of natural aquafaba, that is, obtained by boiling
the grains and not draining the can, allowed us to conclu-
de that this material can be obtained in an accessible and
applicable way, both industrially and at home. Its produc-
tion, as demonstrated here, is simple and does not require
the incorporation of other ingredients. While it may have a
slight foaming disadvantage compared to egg whites, the
data indicate that aquafaba as a vegan food option holds real
promise.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors deeply thank Dr. Angel Berenguer-Murcia for his
valuable support in correcting the language in this work.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The authors declare that they have no conicts of interest of
any kind.
Table 1. Physicochemical properties of natural aquafaba produced in this
study in comparison with canned aquafaba.
Tabla 1. Propiedades sicoquímicas de la aquafaba natural producida en
este estudio en comparación con la aquafaba enlatada.
Property Natural
Aquafaba
Canned
Aquafaba
Density (g/mL) 1.28 ± 0.29a1.33 ± 0.13a
Starch Yes ND*
pH 5.17 ± 0.25b5.85 ± 0.11a
Protein content (mg/mL) 0.93 ± 0.19a1.11 ± 0.16a
Antioxidant activity (%) 27.57 ± 0.64a23.78 ± 0.42b
Total polyphenols content (mg GA/g) 1.68 ± 0.0007a0.84 ± 0.0005b
*Not detectable
Dierent letters in the same row indicate statistical signicant dierences
(p<0.05).
28 Volume XXV, Issue 2
28
Thomas-Meda et al: Biotecnia / XXV (2): 23-29 (2023)
REFERENCES
Aiking, H. 2014. Protein production: planet, prot, plus people?.
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 100: 483S–489S.
Alsalman, F. B., Al-Ruwaih, N., Al-Attar, H. y Mulla, M. Z. 2022.
Eect of high pressure processing on structural and
functional properties of canned aquafaba. Food Science and
Biotechnology. 31: 1157–1167.
Alsalman, F. B. y Ramaswamy, H. S. 2021. Evaluation of changes in
protein quality of high-pressure treated aqueous aquafaba.
Molecules. 26: 234.
Alsalman, F. B., Tulbek, M., Nickerson, M. y Ramaswamy, H.
S. 2020a. Evaluation and optimization of functional and
antinutritional properties of aquafaba. Legume Science. 2:
e30.
Alsalman, F. B., Tulbek, M., Nickerson, M. y Ramaswamy, H. S.
2020b. Evaluation of factors aecting aquafaba rheological
and thermal properties. LWT. 132: 109831.
AOAC. 1990. Ocial Methods of Analysis. 15th ed. Association of
Ocial Analytical Chemists. Washington, D.C.
Arozarena, I., Bertholo, H., Empis, J., Bunger, A. y Sousa, I. 2001.
Study of the total replacement of egg by white lupine
protein, emulsiers and xanthan gum in yellow cakes.
European Food Research and Technology. 213: 312-316.
Aschemann-Witzel, J. y Peschel, A. O. 2019. Consumer perception
of plant-based proteins: The value of source transparency
for alternative protein ingredients. Food Hydrocolloids. 96:
20-28.
Asioli, D., Aschemann-Witzel, J., Caputo, V., Vecchio, R.,
Annunziata, A., Næs, T. y Varela, P. 2017. Making sense of
the “clean label” trends: A review of consumer food choice
behavior and discussion of industry implications. Food
Research International. 99: 58-71.
Aslan, M. y Erta, N. 2020. Possibility of using “chickpea aquafaba”
as egg replacer in traditional cake formulation. Harran Tarım
ve Gıda Bilimleri Dergisi. 24: 1-8.
Aslan, M. y Erta, N. 2021. Foam drying of aquafaba: Optimization
with mixture design. Journal of Food Processing and
Preservation. 45: e15185.
Bessada, S. M. F., Barreira, J. C. M. y Oliveira, M. B. P. P. 2019.
Pulses and food security: Dietary protein, digestibility,
bioactive and functional properties. Trends in Food Science
& Technology. 93: 53-68.
Bovšková, H. y Míková, K. 2011. Factors inuencing egg white
foam quality. Czech Journal of Food Sciences. 29: 322-327.
Boye, J., Zare, F. y Pletch, A. 2010. Pulse proteins: Processing,
characterization, functional properties and applications in
food and feed. Food Research International. 43: 414-431.
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.
Buhl, T. F., Christensen, C. H. y Hammershøj, M. 2019. Aquafaba
as an egg white substitute in food foams and emulsions:
Protein composition and functional behavior. Food
Hydrocolloids. 96: 354-364.
Cai, L., Wu, X., Zhang, Y., Li, X., Ma, S. y Li, J. 2015. Purication and
characterization of three antioxidant peptides from protein
hydrolysate of grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) skin.
Journal of Functional Foods. 16: 234-242.
Caubet, J. C. y Wang, J. 2011. Current understanding of egg
allergy. Pediatric Clinics. 58: 427-443.
Damian, J. J., Huo, S. y Serventi, L. 2018. Phytochemical content
and emulsifying ability of pulses cooking water. European
Food Research and Technology. 244: 1647-1655.
Erem, E., Icyer, N. C., Tatlisu, N. B., Kilicli, M., Kaderoglu, G. H. y
Toker, Ö. S. 2021. A new trend among plant-based food
ingredients in food processing technology: Aquafaba.
Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. 1-18.
Fernando, S. y Manthey, F. A. 2022. Soluble phenolic compounds
aect functional and rheological properties of black bean
protein isolates. Cereal Chemistry. 99:119-129.
Guha, M. y Zakiuddin Ali, S. 2002. Molecular degradation of
starch during extrusion cooking of rice. International Journal
of Food Properties. 5: 509-521.
Gumus, C. E., Decker, E. A. y McClements, D. J. 2017. Formation
and Stability of ω-3 Oil Emulsion-Based Delivery Systems
Using Plant Proteins as Emulsiers: Lentil, Pea, and Faba
Bean Proteins. Food Biophysics. 12: 186-197.
He, Y., Meda, V., Reaney, M. J. y Mustafa, R. 2021a. Aquafaba, a
new plant-based rheological additive for food applications.
Trends in Food Science & Technology. 111: 27-42.
He, Y., Purdy, S. K., Tse, T. J., Tar’an, B., Meda, V., Reaney, M. J. y
Mustafa, R. 2021b. Standardization of aquafaba production
and application in vegan mayonnaise analogs. Foods. 10:
1978.
He, Y., Shim, Y. Y., Mustafa, R., Meda, V. y Reaney, M. J. T. 2019.
Chickpea cultivar selection to produce aquafaba with
superior emulsion properties. Foods. 8: 685.
He, Y., Shim, Y. Y., Shen, J., Kim, J. H., Cho, J. Y., Hong, W. S., Meda,
V. y Reaney, M. J. 2021c. Aquafaba from Korean soybean II:
Physicochemical properties and composition characterized
by NMR analysis. Foods. 10: 2589.
Herald, T. J., Aramouni, F. M. y AbuGhoush, M. H. 2008.
Comparison study of egg yolks and egg alternatives in
French vanilla ice cream. Journal of Texture Studies. 39: 284-
295.
Huang, S., Liu, Y., Zhang, W., Dale, K. J., Liu, S., Zhu, J. y Serventi,
L. 2018. Composition of legume soaking water and
emulsifying properties in gluten-free bread. Food Science
and Technology International. 24: 232-241.
Janssen, M., Busch, C., Rödiger, M. y Hamm, U. 2016. Motives
of consumers following a vegan diet and their attitudes
towards animal agriculture. Appetite. 105: 643-651.
Kim, J., Kim, J., Jeong, S., Kim, M., Park, S., Kim, I., Nam, I., Park,
J. y Moon, K.-D. 2022. The quality characteristics of plant-
based garlic mayonnaise using chickpea aquafaba with
dierent ultrasonic treatment time. Korean Journal of Food
Preservation. 29: 381-394.
Lafarga, T., Villaró, S., Bobo, G. y Aguiló-Aguayo, I. 2019a.
Optimisation of the pH and boiling conditions needed to
obtain improved foaming and emulsifying properties of
chickpea aquafaba using a response surface methodology.
International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science. 18:
100177.
Lafarga, T., Villaró, S., Bobo, G., Simó, J. y Aguiló-Aguayo, I.
2019b. Bioaccessibility and antioxidant activity of phenolic
compounds in cooked pulses. International Journal of Food
Science & Technology. 54: 1816-1823.
29
Volume XXV, Issue 2 29
Thomas-Meda et al: Eect of processing conditions on the functional properties / XXV (2): 23-29 (2023)
Lin, M., Tay, S. H., Yang, H., Yang, B. y Li, H. 2017. Replacement
of eggs with soybean protein isolates and polysaccharides
to prepare yellow cakes suitable for vegetarians. Food
Chemistry. 229: 663-673.
Lu, C., Li, C., Chen, B. y Shen, Y. 2018. Composition and
antioxidant, antibacterial, and anti-HepG2 cell activities of
polyphenols from seed coat of Amygdalus pedunculata Pall.
Food Chemistry. 265: 111-119.
Ma, Z., Boye, J. I. y Simpson, B. K. 2016. Preparation of salad
dressing emulsions using lentil, chickpea and pea protein
isolates: A response surface methodology study. Journal of
Food Quality. 39: 274-291.
McClements, D. J., Bai, L. y Chung, C. 2017. Recent advances in
the utilization of natural emulsiers to form and stabilize
emulsions. Annual Review of Food Science and Technology.
8: 205-236.
Meurer, M. C., de Souza, D. y Marczak, L. D. F. 2020. Eects of
ultrasound on technological properties of chickpea cooking
water (aquafaba). Journal of Food Engineering. 265: 109688.
Muhialdin, B., Mohammed, N., Cheok, H., Farouk, A. y Meor
Hussin, A. 2021. Reducing microbial contamination risk and
improving physical properties of plant-based mayonnaise
produced using chickpea aquafaba. International Food
Research Journal. 28: 547-553.
Mustafa, R., He, Y., Shim, Y. Y. y Reaney, M. J. T. 2018. Aquafaba,
wastewater from chickpea canning, functions as an egg
replacer in sponge cake. International Journal of Food
Science & Technology. 53: 2247-2255.
Mustafa, R. y Reaney, M. J. T. 2020. Aquafaba, from Food Waste to
a ValueAdded Product. En: Food Wastes and Byproducts. R.
Campos-Vega, B. D. Oomah y H. A. Vergara-Castañeda (ed.),
pp 93-126. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, Hoboken, NJ, USA.
Nguyen, T. M. N. y Tran, G. B. 2021. Application of Chickpeas
Aquafaba with pre-treatment as egg replacer in cake
production. Chemical Engineering Transactions. 89: 7-12.
Papalamprou, E. M., Doxastakis, G. I. y Kiosseoglou, V. 2010.
Chickpea protein isolates obtained by wet extraction as
emulsifying agents. Journal of the Science of Food and
Agriculture. 90: 304-313.
Park, H. Y., Yoon, T. J., Kim, H. H., Han, Y. S. y Choi, H. D. 2017.
Changes in the antigenicity and allergenicity of ovalbumin
in chicken egg white by N-acetylglucosaminidase. Food
Chemistry. 217: 342-345.
Patino, J. M. R., Sanchez, C. C. y Niño, M. R. R. 2008. Implications
of interfacial characteristics of food foaming agents in foam
formulations. Advances in Colloid and Interface Science.
140: 95-113.
Raikos, V., Hayes, H. y Ni, H. 2020. Aquafaba from commercially
canned chickpeas as potential egg replacer for the
development of vegan mayonnaise: Recipe optimisation
and storage stability. International Journal of Food Science
& Technology. 55: 1935-1942.
Serventi, L., Wang, S., Zhu, J., Liu, S. y Fei, F. 2018. Cooking water
of yellow soybeans as emulsier in gluten-free crackers.
European Food Research and Technology. 244: 2141-2148.
Sharif, H. R., Williams, P. A., Sharif, M. K., Abbas, S., Majeed, H.,
Masamba, K. G., Safdar, W. y Zhong, F. 2018. Current progress
in the utilization of native and modied legume proteins as
emulsiers and encapsulants–A review. Food Hydrocolloids.
76: 2-16.
Sharima-Abdullah, N., Hassan, C. Z., Arin, N. y Huda-Faujan, N.
2018. Physicochemical properties and consumer preference
of imitation chicken nuggets produced from chickpea our
and textured vegetable protein. International Food Research
Journal. 25:1016-1025.
Shim, Y. Y., Mustafa, R., Shen, J., Ratanapariyanuch, K. y Reaney,
M. J. T. 2018. Composition and properties of aquafaba: water
recovered from commercially canned chickpeas. Journal of
Visualized Experiments. 132: e56305.
Silva, P. G., Kalschne, D. L., Salvati, D., Bona, E. y Rodrigues, A. C.
2022. Aquafaba powder, lentil protein and citric acid as egg
replacer in gluten-free cake: A model approach. Applied
Food Research. 2: 100188.
Stantiall, S. E., Dale, K. J., Calizo, F. S. y Serventi, L. 2018. Application
of pulses cooking water as functional ingredients: the
foaming and gelling abilities. European Food Research and
Technology. 244: 97-104.
Street, H. V. 1994. Measurement of the starch-iodine complex.
En: Methods of enzymatic analysis. H. U. Bergmeyer (ed.), pp
898-903. Elsevier. Inc., Amsterdam.
Włodarczyk, K., Zienkiewicz, A. y Szydłowska-Czerniak, A. 2022.
Radical scavenging activity and physicochemical properties
of aquafaba-based mayonnaises and their functional
ingredients. Foods. 11:1129.
