## 3 Results and Discussion
### Bread Characterization
#### 3.2.4 Proximate Composition  
Comparing with control bread sample, the addition of _S. perennis_ powder promoted the increase of all nutrients of bread, as present in Table 4, except for carbohydrates.  
Regarding moisture content, the results showed an increase in moisture, particularly from B50 to B100 bread samples. As referred in Section 3.2.1, the increase of bread water content in B50 and B100 samples can be due to the higher retention of water during bread baking with the addition of the hygroscopic powder. The addition of dried halophyte powder increased the ash content of breads due to the minerals of the halophyte powder. Regarding the fat content, the incorporation of Sarcocornia powder on breads increases this nutrient but no significant difference was observed between B50 and B100.In terms of protein, similar values were observed for the breads with the incorporation of halophyte powder and the control bread. In terms of total fibre, insoluble and soluble fiber the content B50 and B100 breads increased by two and three folds, respectively. These higher values result from the higher fibre content of halophyte, compared to wheat flour. Indeed, the B50 and B100 breads can be claimed as a source of fibre since the products contains more than 3 g fibre per 100 g. In addition, the B100 bread can be almost considered a product high in  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline  & **CB** & **B50** & **B100** \\ \hline Moisture & 34.06 \(\pm\) 0.07 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 34.75 \(\pm\) 0.10 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 36.19 \(\pm\) 0.10 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ Ash & 2.56 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 2.28 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 3.16 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ Fat & 0.11 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 0.44 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.38 \(\pm\) 0.05 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ Protein & 11.13 \(\pm\) 0.18 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 11.19 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 11.48 \(\pm\) 0.05 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ Total Fibre & 2.15 \(\pm\) 0.14 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 4.40 \(\pm\) 0.12 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 6.83 \(\pm\) 0.15 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ Fibre insoluble & 0.25 \(\pm\) 0.08 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 0.54 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 1.05 \(\pm\) 0.12 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ Fibre soluble & 1.91 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 3.85 \(\pm\) 0.18 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 5.78 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ Carohydrates & 84.00 \(\pm\) 0.35 & 81.70 \(\pm\) 0.11 \({}^{\text{m}}\) & 78.17 \(\pm\) 0.23 \\ Energy (kcal/100 g) & 386.06 \(\pm\) 0.21 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 384.25 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 375.42 \(\pm\) 0.16 \({}^{\text{c}}\) \\ Energy (J/100 g) & 1616.35 \(\pm\) 0.86 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 1608.75 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 1571.84 \(\pm\) 0.69 \({}^{\text{c}}\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Different lowercase letters correspond to significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) between bread samples.  
\end{table}
Table 4: Moisture content (g 100 g\({}^{-1}\) WB) and proximate composition of control (CB), B50 and B100 bread samples (g 100 g\({}^{-1}\) DB).  
Figure 5: Hardness, springiness, cohesiveness and resilience of bread: CB—control bread (1.2% NaCl/0.47% sodium, flour basis); B50—0.235% sodium (flour basis) obtained from _S. perennis_ powder and B100—0.47% sodium (flour basis) obtained from _S. perennis_ different letters on the same texture parameter are significantly different (one-way ANOVA, \(p<0.05\)).  
fibre because its content is near of 6 g of fibre per 100 g [39]. The content of fiber in bread is an important aspect both in the dough behaviour as well as for its well-known health benefits. The carbohydrate content of control, B50 and B100 remained relatively constant as well the caloric value of all samples, ranging from 386.06 to 375.42 kcal/100 g.