## 3 Results and Discussion
### Characteristics of Quality Parameters of Wheat Flour and Sugar Beet Pulp Mixtures
#### 3.2.2 Parameters Characterized the Starch Complex of Wheat Flour and Sugar Beet Pulp Mixtures
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Quality Characteristics of**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Quantity of the SBP Additive**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Type of Fortification**} & **Interaction** \\  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(Factor A)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(Factor B)**} & **(A \(\times\) B)** \\ \cline{2-7}  & **0\%** & **1\%** & **5\%** & **10\%** & **umSBP** & **mSBP** & **_p-Value_ \\ \hline Falling number, (s) & 328 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) & 339 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 335 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 319 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 331 \({}^{\text{A}}\) & 330 \({}^{\text{A}}\) & 0.0095 \({}^{\text{*}}\) \\ Starch gelatinization, C3 & 1.986 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 2.049 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 2.011 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 1.992 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 2.054 \({}^{\text{B}}\) & 1.965 \({}^{\text{A}}\) & 0.0000 \({}^{\text{*}}\) \\ (N\(\cdot\)m) & 1.836 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 1.943 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 1.868 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 1.672 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 1.839 \({}^{\text{B}}\) & 1.820 \({}^{\text{A}}\) & 0.0001 \({}^{\text{*}}\) \\ Starch retrogradation, C5 & 2.862 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 2.932 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 2.629 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 2.248 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 2.664 & 2.672 & 0.0000 \({}^{\text{*}}\) \\ (N\(\cdot\)m) & & & & & & & \\ \hline Initial starch gelatinization & 54.2 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 54.4 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) & 54.7 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 54.6 \({}^{\text{b,c}}\) & 54.4 \({}^{\text{A}}\) & 54.5 \({}^{\text{A}}\) & 0.0000 \({}^{\text{*}}\) \\ temperature, D2 (N\(\cdot\)m) & 78.0 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 78.4 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 78.0 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 73.9 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 76.8 \({}^{\text{A}}\) & 77.3 \({}^{\text{B}}\) & 0.0000 \({}^{\text{*}}\) \\ \hline Starch gelatinization speed, & 1.478 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 1.517 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 1.393 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 1.362 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 1.460 \({}^{\text{B}}\) & 1.415 \({}^{\text{A}}\) & 0.0000 \({}^{\text{*}}\) \\ Amylase degradation speed, & 0.150 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 0.106 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.144 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 0.319 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 0.215 \({}^{\text{B}}\) & 0.145 \({}^{\text{A}}\) & 0.0000 \({}^{\text{*}}\) \\ Starch retrogradation rate, & 1.027 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 0.990 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 0.761 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 0.576 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.825 \({}^{\text{A}}\) & 0.852 \({}^{\text{B}}\) & 0.0000 \({}^{\text{*}}\) \\ C5-C4 (N\(\cdot\)m) & & & & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Factors affecting starch complex of wheat flour with sugar beet pulp mixtures. enzymatic hydrolysis, expressed by C3-C4, which, in the lowest amount of SBP, decreased, while the 10% addition was two times higher than for the wheat flour control. The highest value of C3-C4 was found for the 10% of SBP, which indicates the lowest hot gel stability. The influence of SBP addition was also reflected in starch retrogradation C5-C4, which was 1.8 times lower with a 10% addition of SBP than for the wheat flour control. The mSBP mixtures were characterized by slightly lower Mixolab(r) values of C3, C4, C3-C2, and C3-C4, while the C5, D3, and C5-C4 were slightly higher. Based on the results regarding starch retrogradation in the discussed recipe of flour mixtures (Table 3), it seems highly probable that the staling process of bread will be slower in the case of bread being fortified with SBP powder in larger doses, especially without molasses (umSBP). Considering the results discussed above (Table 3), there is a need to reformulate the recipe composition of bread supplemented with SBP to optimize the amyloid activity requirements of bread flour by adding, e.g., malt flour or microbiological enzyme preparations with alpha-amylase activity.