## 3 Results and Discussion
### Techno-Functional Properties  
The water-holding capacity (WHC) showed values of between 2.25 g/g and 3.10 g/g, with values being lower in the flour samples than in the protein concentrates (Table 5). The oil-holding capacity (OHC) did not show significant differences between flours and concentrates or within commercial brands, with values ranging from 0.88 g/g to 1.26 g/g. No significant differences between brands were observed in the case of flours; however, the organic concentrate showed a lower WHC. The water-holding capacity is related to the taste and texture of foods, while the oil-holding capacity has been related to the emulsifying capacity of foods [62]. [PERSON] et al. [36] described WHC values as being slightly lower for protein concentrates between 1.3 g/g and 1.8 g/g. Protein denaturation is positively correlated with WHC [32], which could explain why flours have a lower WHC than concentrates owing to the production process. In relation to the OHC, [PERSON] [63] reported that native proteins show a lower capacity than their denatured counterparts \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Hemp Flows**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Hemp Protein Concentrates**} \\ \cline{2-5}  & **Organic** & **Conventional** & **Organic** & **Conventional** \\ \hline TPC (mg GAE/100 g & 79.53 \(\pm\) 2.81 b & 66.42 \(\pm\) 0.72 a & 55.32 \(\pm\) 0.03 a & 69.14 \(\pm\) 5.12 ab \\ TFC (mg rutin/100 g) & 58.24 \(\pm\) 4.05 a & 66.65 \(\pm\) 0.09 a & 72.12 \(\pm\) 0.12 b & 83.10 \(\pm\) 12.24 b \\ F/DF (mg pinocomphrin/100 g) & 620.31 \(\pm\) 6.19 a & 580.62 \(\pm\) 37.71 a & 768.75 \(\pm\) 6.15 b & 656.14 \(\pm\) 4.75 ab \\ TEAC (nmol Trolox/100 g) & 3.45 \(\pm\) 0.09 b & 3.75 \(\pm\) 0.87 b & 2.35\(\pm\) 3.01 a & 2.54 \(\pm\) 9.05 a \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} a,b Values in the same row followed by different letters are significantly different (\(p<0.05\)). TPC: total phenolic content, TFC: total flavonoid content, F/DF: flavanols (catechin and epicatechin), isoflavionids antioxidant activity.  
\end{table} 
Table 4: Mean values (\(\pm\)standard deviation) of the phenolic composition and antioxidant capacity of different hemp flours and protein concentrates. owing to their structural folding, which means that flours should show a lower OHC. In our samples, the WHC showed a positive correlation with the concentration of the minerals Mg (r2 = 0.994) and K (r2 = 0.998). However, the OHC showed a negative correlation with the MUFA (r2 = \(-\)0.995) and ash (r2 = \(-\)0.992) content, and a positive correlation with the PUFA content (r2 = 0.991). The solubility (WSI) of the hemp flours showed a large difference between the two commercial flour brands tested. However, the protein concentrates showed no differences between the two brands. Previous studies reported WSI values of 9.37 g/100 g for hemp flows [64] and 35.60% for hemp concentrates [65]. The difference from the data found in this research is due to the analysis methodology used in the different studies. The WSI is strongly related to the partial hydrolysis of proteins owing to the increase in low-molecular-weight peptides, which means that values of around 30% of protein hydrolysis give the highest values of WSI [66]. In our samples, the solubility index showed a positive correlation with the starch content (r2 = 0.982). These results agree with those previously reported by [PERSON] et al. [67], who pointed out that the WSI can be used as an indicator of starch degradation. On the other hand, WSI could also depend on the different proportion of albumin fraction in the samples, as albumins have a higher solubility than globulins owing to the lower level of some amino acids (aromatic and hydrophobic) and the less rigid conformational structure [36]. The swelling capacity of flours and concentrates is related to their ability to generate greater volume when incorporated into a food, and their value depends on temperature [68].