## 3 Results and Discussion
### Structural and Physical-Chemical Characteristics of Functional Bread
#### 3.1.5 Moisture Content  
Regarding the moisture content of the analyzed bread samples (as shown in Table 3), it was observed that the control sample had the lowest moisture content of 34.23%. However, all functional bread samples with added sea buckthorn pomace powder had significantly (\(p<0.05\)) higher moisture content than the control sample, ranging between 45.24% and 43.89%. There were no significant differences in the moisture content observed among the functional bread samples with added sea buckthorn pomace powder.  
[PERSON] et al., 2019 [12] also found that the moisture content in bread samples increased as the percentage of sea buckthorn pulp added increased, with values ranging from 32.84 \(\pm\) 0.56% for the control sample to 36.23 \(\pm\) 0.32% for bread with 10% sea buckthorn pulp added. This suggests that an increase in the percentage of sea buckthorn leads to higher moisture content. In biscuits with sea buckthorn by-products, [PERSON] et al., 2019 [30] found that the moisture content was 95.23 \(\pm\) 0.57% for those obtained at 50 \({}^{\circ}\)C for 12 h and 96.55 \(\pm\) 0.57% for those with thermal treatment at 80 \({}^{\circ}\)C for 5 h. In contrast, [PERSON] and [PERSON], 2021 [28] found that the moisture content of bakery products obtained by adding marc powder obtained from blueberry, cloudberry, rowan, and sea buckthorn was similar to or slightly lower than the control sample. Furthermore, [PERSON] et al., 2016 [17] noted that as the proportion of sea buckthorn flour increased in pastry products; the moisture content decreased from 22% in the control sample to 20% for gingerbread with 4% sea buckthorn, while for sponge cakes, the moisture content decreased from 36.6% in the control sample to 36.12% in the sample with 4% sea buckthorn flour. The authors explained that the addition of sea buckthorn flour led to a decrease in the amount of wet gluten in the product, which resulted in a reduction in moisture in the final product.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline \hline
**Sample** & **Moisture (\%)** & **Acidity (deg)** & **a\({}_{\text{w}}\)** \\ \hline Control & 34.23 \(\pm\) 0.71 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 1.3 \(\pm\) 0.01 & 0.949 \(\pm\) 0.001 \({}^{\text{b,d,e}}\) \\ C6 & 45.24 \(\pm\) 0.35 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) & 2.2 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) & 0.935 \(\pm\) 0.001 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ C8 & 44.75 \(\pm\) 0.43 \({}^{\text{a,c}}\) & 1.5 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 0.964 \(\pm\) 0.001 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ C10 & 44.33 \(\pm\) 0.28 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 2.2 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) & 0.960 \(\pm\) 0.001 \({}^{\text{a,b,c}}\) \\ M6 & 44.61 \(\pm\) 0.34 \({}^{\text{a,c}}\) & 2.2 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) & 0.945 \(\pm\) 0.001 \({}^{\text{d,e}}\) \\ M8 & 44.62 \(\pm\) 0.43 \({}^{\text{a,c}}\) & 2.2 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) & 0.939 \(\pm\) 0.001 \({}^{\text{e}}\) \\ M10 & 44.48 \(\pm\) 0.39 \({}^{\text{a,c}}\) & 1.7 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 0.960 \(\pm\) 0.001 \({}^{\text{a,d}}\) \\ S6 & 44.58 \(\pm\) 0.33 \({}^{\text{a,c}}\) & 2.2 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.941 \(\pm\) 0.001 \({}^{\text{e}}\) \\ S8 & 44.47 \(\pm\) 0.42 \({}^{\text{b,c}}\) & 2.6 \(\pm\) 0.03 & 0.942 \(\pm\) 0.001 \({}^{\text{c,d,e}}\) \\ S10 & 43.89 \(\pm\) 0.22 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 2.8 \(\pm\) 0.01 & 0.937 \(\pm\) 0.001 \({}^{\text{e}}\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* All the results are mean \(\pm\) standard deviation. Means followed by a common letter are not significantly different (\(p>0.05\)). Values followed by different superscript letters in the same column are significantly different (\(p<0.05\)). Means that do not share a letter in a column are significantly different (\(p<0.05\)).
* **2023**, 13, 6513  
\end{table}
Table 3: The physical–chemical characteristics of functional bread with sea buckthorn pomace powder (mean \(\pm\) SD).