Search

The utilization of frozen dough technology presents a compelling solution for prolonging the shelf life of flour products and enhancing production efficiency. This technology has been widely applied and continuously studied. However, the intricate production process of frozen dough introduces a persistent challenge—freezing damage—that impacts different components of frozen dough like starch, gluten protein, yeast, and lipid. This damage leads to a decline in dough quality. This review offers a comprehensive summary of changes occurring in different components in frozen dough from a multiscale perspective, specifically starch, gluten protein, lipid, and yeast. The process improvement methods involving from the main materials to the end products in the actual production process of frozen dough have been discussed. These encompass the selection and optimization of main materials, improvement of yeast freeze tolerance, additives, frozen processes (freezing, storage, and thawing), and dough-making processes. The selection of wheat flour with high gluten strength and the use of composite flour with high dietary fiber can improve the freezing resistance of gluten–starch matrix. The freeze tolerance of yeast can be improved through hybridization, genetic engineering, pretreatment with polycationic peptide (ε-poly- l -lysine), microencapsulation technology, and the addition of anti-freeze agents. In addition to improving the use-effect of different additives, effective methods of obtaining additives and synergistic combinations of multiple additives are in focus. Different frozen doughs need to choose an appropriate freezing rate. The novel physical field-assisted freezing technology has a positive effect on reducing freezing damage. For frozen storage, the subfreezing temperature (−12 °C) is more environmentally friendly and the lower storage temperature is more stable. The innovative microwave thawing has a poor application effect for frozen dough presently. Innovative dough-making processes such as vacuum mixing, heat treatment before dough freezing (part-baked, par-steamed, and preheated dough), and edible coatings are worth exploring. • The quality deterioration mechanism of frozen dough is elucidated with the changes of gluten–starch matrix and other components. • The improvement of the flour and yeast freezing tolerance can improve the quality of frozen dough. • Synergistic combinations of multiple additives can improve the effect of additives. • There is still plenty of room for innovation in frozen dough production such as freezing, storing, thawing and making dough. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Gluten proteins are considered as quality determinants in cereal-based food product by forming the backbone structure of dough. Freezing technique has largely expanded the dough shelf life and brought revolutionary development to the bakery industry. However, deterioration of gluten network in frozen dough is one of the major factors leading to the quality loss of bakery products. During the manufacturing process of frozen dough, hydration with optimum mixing is the first and critical step to manage the control dough quality, followed by the freezing and frozen storage to achieve the long time storage of dough, which determines the final dough quality. Scope and approach Series of physicochemical alterations in gluten proteins occur upon the dough formation and frozen storage. Understanding these fundamental changes is important for the research community to propose more rational implementation of specific improvement principals for frozen dough. In this review, the physicochemical alterations of wheat gluten proteins are investigated from the perspectives of gluten and its component glutenin and gliadin. Key findings and conclusions A more structure-ordered, homogeneous and elastic gluten network is formed at the optimum mixing stage as a consequence of glutenin and gliadin interactions. Comparative studies in different model systems demonstrate that further frozen storage exerts detrimental effects on gluten proteins in diverse ways from both gluten proteins-water interactions and structure-functionality perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]