## 3 Results and Discussion
### Sensory Evaluation  
Substitution of wheat by GPP significantly influenced most of the selected sensory attributes (Figure 2). In terms of appearance, GPP inclusion significantly affected color uniformity, porosity, and crust thickness. In particular, crust thickness decreased as the fortification level increased. As for the aroma, increasing the amount of GPP in the dough significantly decreased the overall intensity of fragrance, defined as the characteristic bread scent. Instead, as expected, the wine smell significantly increased as the GPP inclusion increased. GPP inclusion also significantly affected the taste and flavor of the bread: in particular, the global flavor and acidity increased significantly with the GPP inclusion, while the sweet taste was reduced by the GPP inclusion. In terms of texture and tactile sensations, GPP fortification significantly influenced the crumb moisture, the crust hardness, the g  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Sample** & **TPC** & **FRAP** & **ABTS** \\
**(mg GAE 100g\({}^{-1}\) DM)** & **(uM TE 100 g\({}^{-1}\) DM)** & **(uM TE 100g\({}^{-1}\) DM)** \\ \hline
**GP0** & 29.08 \(\pm\) 1.45 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 199.72 \(\pm\) 9.69 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 240.00 \(\pm\) 7.90 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\
**GP5** & 101.5 \(\pm\) 7.68 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 795.26 \(\pm\) 63.11 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 999.50 \(\pm\) 24.78 \({}^{\text{b}}\) \\
**GP10** & 207.06 \(\pm\) 9.25 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 1577.39 \(\pm\) 87.20 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 1540.83 \(\pm\) 47.45 \({}^{\text{c}}\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Values with different superscripts within the same column are significantly different for \(p<0.01\).  
\end{table}
Table 7: Total phenolic compounds (TPC) and antioxidant activity (FRAP and ABTS) of control bread (GP0) and bread fortified with different percentages of grape pomace (GP5 and GP10).  
Figure 2: Sensory profile of quality attributes of bread fortified with different grape pomace levels (GP0 black line; GP5 gray line; GP10 light gray line). Sensory attributes were evaluated using a hedonic 9-point scale, where 1 and 9 indicate the lowest and the highest intensity, respectively.  
of bread along with the color parameters. As expected, incremental addition of GPP resulted in a significantly higher amount of TPC in bread samples and allowed increasing antioxidant activity in GP5 and GP10 compared with the control. Finally, although GPP inclusion significantly influenced aroma, taste, appearance, and flavor, a nonsignificant impact on the overall acceptability of the fortified products was observed. In conclusion, GPP represents a suitable ingredient for bakery purposes since it has a significant impact on total dietary fiber as well as on the polyphenol content and antioxidant activity of the fortified bread, achieving a similar acceptability score compared to traditional bread.  
Conceptualization B.S.; Formal Analysis G.R., M.C., and R.T.; Methodology B.S. and G.G.; Data Curation G.G., G.R., and R.T.; Writing--Original Draft Preparation F.B., G.G., G.R., and R.T.; Writing--Review and Editing B.S., C.R., F.B., G.G., G.R., and R.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  
This research was funded by FSE 1695-0016-1463-2019 and JP 2018 (CUP B34 ID18000050003).  
Ethical review and approval were waived for this study since the participation was voluntary. All data were anonymous.  
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained for from all subjects involved in the study.  
Not applicable.  
Common white wheat flour was kindly supplied by Macinazione Lendinara SpA as well as characterization of dough rheology (Arcoole, Italy). Grape pomace (Vitis vinifera cv. Corvina) was kindly supplied by Cantina Ripa Della Volta (Verona, Italy).  
The authors declare no conflict of interest.