## 3 Results
### Shelf Life: Texture Properties of Breads during Storage Time  
Supplemented breads were evaluated throughout the storage time; hardness, chewiness and springiness were tested for Pita bread, and for Tandoori breads, extensibility and toughness were tested (Figures 3-7). Figure 5: The impact of the added FI on Pita breads Chewiness. The a, b and c letters at each sampling time indicate statistically significant differences (\(p<0.05\)). Values are mean \(\pm\) SEM of 6 replicates. Figure 6: The impact of the added FI on Tandoori breads toughness. The a and b letters at each sampling time indicate statistically significant differences (\(p<0.05\)). Values are mean \(\pm\) SEM of 6 replicates. WWF significantly (\(p<0.05\)) increased hardness and chewiness in Pita bread on the first day of storage, but IN significantly (\(p<0.05\)) decreased them compared to the control (Figure 3). On the third day, only IN significantly (\(p<0.05\)) decreased chewiness and hardness, and other FI had no effect. Furthermore, springiness was significantly (\(p<0.05\)) reduced with WWF addition (Figure 4). On the sixth day, data showed that IN significantly reduced (\(p<0.05\)) both chewiness and hardness (Figure 5). Furthermore, hardness and the other characteristics of GG bread showed no significant differences. On the ninth day of storage, only GG and IN significantly (\(p<0.05\)) decreased chewiness and hardness. On the twelfth day, some microbial growth was noticed using a microscope on the surface of breads with all the combinations and IN. Therefore, they were terminated and eliminated from the study. However, their textures were still acceptable. The observations of day 12 showed that WWF and GG significantly decreased hardness and chewiness compared to Pita control. On the first day of Tandoori bread storage, no significant differences were seen in the comparison to control except for the chewiness of bread with all FI. On the third day, WWF, GG and a combination of all the ingredients significantly reduced (\(p<0.05\)) toughness (Figure 6). Furthermore, bread supplemented with WWF and combinations of all FI reduced extensibility (Figure 7). On the sixth day, negligible alterations were documented. After the sixth day of storage, mold growth was seen, and breads were not considered and removed from the experiment. It is obvious that substituting flour with FI, particularly IN, GG and all in combination, could decrease chewiness and hardness to a reasonable extent. The data from the sensory assessment indicated that all samples of both breads recorded above five points (five considered successful points). Furthermore, the data analysis of Pita bread showed that there were no significant differences between the Pita breads for texture, appearance and elasticity (Figure 8). In contrast, the flavour of bread with IN obtained 7.3, which was statistically higher (\(p<0.05\)) than WWF bread (5.5), GG bread (5.7) and bread control (5.6). Similarly, overall acceptability and chewiness of bread with IN scored 7.3 and 7.1, respectively, followed by bread with all the combinations with 6.6 and 6.8, GG 6.1 and 6.0, WWF 5.7 and 5.7 and the control 5.7 and 5.6, respectively. In both attributes, only IN was statistically different from WWF and the control. It is  
Figure 7: The impact of the added FI on Tandoori breads extensibility (mm). The a and b letters at each sampling time indicate statistically significant differences (\(p<0.05\)). Values are mean\(\pm\) SEM of 6 samples. worth mentioning that all the breads containing FI obtained five or above; thus, they were considered acceptable. For Tandoori breads, in terms of chewiness, texture, appearance and elasticity, no significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) were seen (Figure 9). Whereas for flavour and overall acceptability, bread with all the combinations scored highest with 7.3 and 7.2, followed by GG bread (6.3 and 6.6), the control bread (6.3 and 6.4), IN bread (6.0 and 6.2) and WWF (6.0 and 6.2).