## 3 Results and Discussion  
### Particle Size and Amylose/Damaged Starch Content  
The BP sample chemical content per dry basis was 72.8 \(\pm\) 0.5% starch, 5.6 \(\pm\) 0.1% fiber, 16.1 \(\pm\) 0.3% protein, 3.3 \(\pm\) 0.1% fat, and 1.97 \(\pm\) 0.07% ash, while the SP sample was 73.9% \(\pm\) 0.4 starch, 1.65 \(\pm\) 0.2% fiber, 18.5 \(\pm\) 0.3% protein, 3.9 \(\pm\) 0.1% fat, and 1.79 \(\pm\) 0.08% ash. The WT sample was 79.8 \(\pm\) 0.4% starch, 6.1 \(\pm\) 0.2% fiber, 10.3 \(\pm\) 0.4% protein, 2.1 \(\pm\) 0.1% fat, and 1.7 \(\pm\) 0.04% ash, while the BT sample was 79.1 \(\pm\) 0.6% starch, 7.3 \(\pm\) 0.2% fiber, 9.1 \(\pm\) 0.6% protein, 2.4 \(\pm\) 0.3% fat, and 2.2 \(\pm\) 0.5% ash. The flour granulometry measured by sieving and amylose/damaged starch content are shown in Table 1.  
Comparing the particle size distribution of buckwheat flows, the native Polish buckwheat flour was mainly distributed into three fractions (>200 \(\upmu\)m, >200-150 \(\upmu\)m, and 150-106 \(\upmu\)m), while Spanish buckwheat flour showed a greater number of bigger particles, evenly distributed between the >200 \(\upmu\)m and 200-150 \(\upmu\)m fractions. The microwave treatment significantly reduced the smallest fraction (<106 \(\upmu\)m) share, and that phenomenon was observed for all the native flours samples. As the MW-treated flours were not processed after treatment, the granulometry ranges reveal the changes occurring during the processing. Constant mixing and heating led to thermo-mechanical modifications of the granule surfaces, facilitating disruption, agglomeration, and recreation of particles. A similar behavior was observed by [PERSON] et al. and [PERSON] et al. [34; 35] for lower initial moisture content treatments. A 30% initial water content allows amylose  
\begin{table} \begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Sample**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**\begin{tabular}{c} **\textgreater{}200 \(\upmu\)m** \\ **[\%]** \\ \end{tabular} } & **200–106 \(\upmu\)m** & **150–106 \(\upmu\)m** & **<106 \(\upmu\)m** & **Amylose [\%]** & **Chamaged Starch** \\  & & **[\%]** & **[\%]** & **[\%]** & **[\%]** & **[\% w/w]** \\ \hline BP & 25.57 \(\pm\) 0.62 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 41.67 \(\pm\) 0.89 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 26.52 \(\pm\) 1.30 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 6.25 \(\pm\) 1.58 \({}^{\text{bc}}\) & 23 \(\pm\) 2 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 1.60 \(\pm\) 0.10 \\ BPT & 43.70 \(\pm\) 2.12 \({}^{\text{g}}\) & 40.35 \(\pm\) 1.77 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 12.35 \(\pm\) 1.20 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 3.60 \(\pm\) 0.85 \({}^{\text{abc}}\) & 20 \(\pm\) 3 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 1.70 \(\pm\) 0.15 \\ SB & 36.55 \(\pm\) 0.21 \({}^{\text{f}}\) & 66.85 \(\pm\) 1.77 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 10.80 \(\pm\) 0.57 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 8.75 \(\pm\) 0.49 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 33 \(\pm\) 3 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 0.91 \(\pm\) 0.09 \\ SBT & 31.80 \(\pm\) 1.05 \({}^{\text{e}}\) & 78.80 \(\pm\) 0.85 \({}^{\text{f}}\) & 15.95 \(\pm\) 0.35 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 1.40 \(\pm\) 1.56 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) & 29 \(\pm\) 2 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 0.99 \(\pm\) 0.04 \\ WT & 2.13 \(\pm\) 1.27 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) & 71.00 \(\pm\) 1.13 \({}^{\text{e}}\) & 22.00 \(\pm\) 3.54 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 4.88 \(\pm\) 5.93 \({}^{\text{abc}}\) & 32 \(\pm\) 1 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 1.37 \(\pm\) 0.01 \\ WTT & 0.40 \(\pm\) 0.28 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 87.85 \(\pm\) 0.78 \({}^{\text{g}}\) & 11.00 \(\pm\) 0.28 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.75 \(\pm\) 0.21 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 26 \(\pm\) 5 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) & 1.01 \(\pm\) 0.07 \\ BT & 13.60 \(\pm\) 1.70 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 30.95 \(\pm\) 0.64 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 16.55 \(\pm\) 0.92 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 15.95 \(\pm\) 1.77 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 28 \(\pm\) 3 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) & 1.72 \(\pm\) 0.02 \\ BTT & 3.85 \(\pm\) 0.35 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 47.00 \(\pm\) 1.56 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 18.88 \(\pm\) 0.20 \({}^{\text{bc}}\) & 2.32 \(\pm\) 0.31 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) & 21 \(\pm\) 4 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 1.24 \(\pm\) 0.06 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  \
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Sample**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**