# Use of Bilberry and Blackcurrant Pomace Powders as Functional Ingredients in Cookies
## 3 Results and Discussion
### Texture Properties of Cookies
  
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline \hline  & **CC** & **CBI2.5** & **CBI5.0** & **CBI10.0** \\ \hline Hardness (N) & 5.16 \(\pm\) 0.56 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 4.45 \(\pm\) 0.50 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 5.78 \(\pm\) 0.36 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 6.09 \(\pm\) 0.31 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ \hline Adhesiveness (J) & \(-\)3.33 \(\pm\) 0.70 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) & \(-\)2.84 \(\pm\) 0.22 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(-\)3.35 \(\pm\) 0.41 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) & \(-\)3.54 \(\pm\) 0.27 \({}^{\text{b}}\) \\ \hline Resilience (dimensionless) & 0.73 \(\pm\) 0.04 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.74 with BCPP: Similar results have been reported by [PERSON] et al. [68] for cookies enriched with carrot pomace powder and by [PERSON] et al. [3] for cookies supplemented with carrot and apple pomace. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [11] also reported that the hardness of biscuits fortified with pear pomace powder decreased as the pear pomace addition level increased. [PERSON] et al. [19] found that the hardness decreased in cookies supplemented with apple pomace as compared to the control and attributed this evolution to the high fiber content in apple pomace, possessing higher water holding capacity than wheat flour, which diminishes the water available for gluten development and thus leads to the development of a weaker gluten network. In contrast, the addition of grape [24] or grapefruit [6] pomace was found to increase the hardness of the cookies. The decrease in hardness has been attributed to the increase in the dietary fiber content, which may disrupt the gluten network structure, resulting in a softer texture, and may act similarly to an emulsifier, promoting a more uniform distribution of fat and other ingredients within the dough, thus leading to a more homogeneous texture and reduced hardness in cookies [11; 82]. On the contrary, the increase in hardness reported in other studies has been attributed to the decrease in the protein content in the batter, resulting in a reduction in aeration and the development of a dense structure, as well as to \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c} \hline \hline  & **CC** & **CBI2.5** & **CBI5.0** & **CBI10.0** \\ \hline Hardness (N) & 72.75 \(\pm\) 1.09 a & 64.71 \(\pm\) 0.45 b & 61.74 \(\pm\) 1.55 c & 59.88 \(\pm\) 0.31 d \\ \hline Springiness (mm) & 0.97 \(\pm\) 0.02 a & 0.97 \(\pm\) 0.01 a & 0.98 \(\pm\) 0.01 a & 0.98 \(\pm\) 0.01 a \\ \hline Cohesiveness (dimensionless) & 0.77 \(\pm\) 0.01 a & 0.77 \(\pm\) 0.01 a & 0.77 \(\pm\) 0.01 a & 0.67 \(\pm\) 0.06 b \\ \hline Chewiness (N) & 53.93 \(\pm\) 0.81 a & 40.65 \(\pm\) 0.52 c & 46.50 \(\pm\) 0.93 b & 39.14 \(\pm\) 0.67 c \\ \hline Gumminess (N) & 55.72 \(\pm\) 0.94 a & 41.91 \(\pm\) 0.52 c & 47.67 \(\pm\) 0.82 b & 40.01 \(\pm\) 1.24 d \\ \hline Fracturability (mm) & 0.85 \(\pm\) 0.03 d & 3.53 \(\pm\) 0.11 c & 3.80 \(\pm\) 0.07 b & 3.97 \(\pm\) 0.14 a \\ \hline Puncturing force (N) & 16.84 \(\pm\) 0.83 a & 9.99 \(\pm\) 0.18 c & 11.44 \(\pm\) 0.44 b & 12.24 \(\pm\) 0.33 b \\ \hline Shear force (N) & 73.97 \(\pm\) 3.13 a & 57.81 \(\pm\) 3.53 c & 63.65 \(\pm\) 1.33 b & 66.85 \(\pm\) 0.78 b \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences between cookie formulations (_p_ < 0.05); CC—control cookie; CBI2.5, CBI5.0, and CBI0.0—c cookies with 2.5%, 5%, and 10% of the wheat flour replaced by BIPP, respectively.  
\end{table} 
Table 8: Effect of bilberry pomace powder addition on the textural properties of the cookies.