## 3 Results and Discussion
### 3.2.0 ugh Mixing Properties  
The influence of the protein concentrate additions on the dough mixing properties is summarized in Table 3.  
Water absorption increased as the level of protein concentrates increased. PP significantly increased (\(p<0.05\)) dough water absorption by almost 3.5% (5 PP), 9.9% (10 PP), and 19.8% (15 PP), while in the case of SP, the maximum increase was by 3.2% (15 SP). Proteins are one of the main components involved in water adsorption, and the type of protein is responsible for the increase in water absorption [24]. [PERSON] et al. [25]  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Bread Samples** & **Moisture (\%)** & **Protein (\%)** & **Fat (\%)** & **Ash (\%)** & **Carbohydrates (\%)** & **Energy (kcal/100g)** & **Energy from Protein (\%)** \\ \hline Control & 45.19 \(\pm\) 0.08 & 7.61 \(\pm\) 0.10  & 1.00 \(\pm\) 0.10  & 219.6 \(\pm\) 0.58  \\
5 PP & 46.06 \(\pm\) 0.05  & 0.80 \(\pm\) 0.03  & 42.86 \(\pm\) 0.19  & 17.30 \(\pm\) 0.39  & 1.05 \(\pm\) 0.03  & 21.69 \(\pm\) 0.27 [FOOTNOTE:]Footnote : Calculated by difference. **\(\ast\)** Calculated based on the energy content, protein content, and 4 kcal/g protein. The results are mean \(\pm\) standard deviation (n = 3). Values followed by different superscript letters in the same column are significantly different (\(p<0.05\)). [ENDFOOTNOTE] \\
15 PP & 48.76 \(\pm\) 0.07  & 0.81 \(\pm\) 0.01  & 36.25 \(\pm\) 0.16  & 15.33 \(\pm\) 0.26 [FOOTNOTE:]Footnote : Calculated by difference. **\(\ast\)** Calculated based on the energy content, protein content, and 4 kcal/g protein. The results are mean \(\pm\) standard deviation (n = 3). Values followed by different superscript letters in the same column are significantly different (\(p<0.05\)). [ENDFOOTNOTE] \\
10 SP & 49.28 \(\pm\) 0.09 [FOOTNOTE:]Footnote : Calculated by difference. **\(\ast\)** Calculated based on the energy content, protein content, and 4 kcal/g protein. The results are mean \(\pm\) standard deviation (n = 3). Values followed by different superscript letters in the same column are significantly different (\(p<0.05\)). [ENDFOOTNOTE] & 1.43 \(\pm\) 0.06 [FOOTNOTE:]Footnote : Calculated by difference. **\(\ast\)** Calculated based on the energy content, protein content, and 4 kcal/g protein. The results are mean \(\pm\) standard deviation (n =showed that the supplementation of wheat flour with 10% pea protein isolate (with a protein content of 96.1% dry matter basis) determined an increase in water absorption, a fact that was explained through the capacity of proteins to absorb a high quantity of water. In the present study, a high correlation between water absorption and the protein contents of the breads was found (\(r\) = 0.9441). The dough development time of the SP breads were significantly higher than the control bread (\(p\) < 0.05). In addition, the stability time was significantly increased (\(p\) < 0.05) by SP addition compared with the control, which denotes a stronger dough structure. However, there was no concentration-dependent tendency in the stability time, as there were no significant differences (\(p\) > 0.05) between the three levels of SP addition. The same trend was observed for the 5 PP and 10 PP samples. On the other hand, the 15% PP addition had the effect of decreasing the dough stability compared with lower levels of addition (5% and 10%), but it did not significantly differ (\(p\) > 0.05) from the control. A similar behaviour with an increase in the dough stability through the addition of soy protein was reported by [PERSON] et al. [10], while in contrast, the incorporation of whey protein brought a decrease in the dough stability time. The addition of 5% PP and 5% SP showed higher values for the C2 parameter, which denotes a dough with strong mixing resistance, while higher addition levels lead to a reduced strength in the protein network. The highest weakening of the gluten network was found for the samples 15 PP, 10 SP, and 15 SP. The results are similar to [PERSON] et al.