## 4 Conclusions  
The functional and thermo-mechanical properties of the rice flours are influenced by the chemical composition. The amylose, damaged starch, fiber, and protein contents influenced the retention capacity of different solvents. The investigation of the thermo-mechanical behavior of dough also showed differences regarding the protein quality. Thus, BRF presented higher values of the thermo-mechanical weakening, suggesting a higher resistance of the proteins during heating, while the proteins from NRF had a lower resistance. The amount of water used to prepare the dough influenced its behavior during heating and cooling. Thus, C3, C4, C5, and (C5-C4) decreased with the increase of the water absorption. A positive effect of the use of a larger amount of water for dough preparation  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Properties**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Samples**} \\ \cline{2-7}  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**ARF**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**BRF**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**NRF**} \\ \cline{2-7}  & **WA1** & **WA2** & **WA1** & **WA2** & **WA1** & **WA2** \\ \hline Specific volume, g/cm\({}^{3}\) & 193.82 \(\pm\) 1.60 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 196.89 \(\pm\) 1.84 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 181.53 \(\pm\) 1.50 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 183.36 \(\pm\) 1.52 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 195.51 \(\pm\) 1.33 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 199.76 \(\pm\) 1.65 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) \\ \hline \multicolumn{7}{c}{Firmness, g force} & 1444.5 \(\pm\) 42.0 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 1302.1 \(\pm\) 20.3 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 1845.4 \(\pm\) 45 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 1573.9 \(\pm\) 29.6 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 1308.0 \(\pm\) 35.4 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 1219.9 \(\pm\) 26.5 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) \\ \hline L* & 60.61 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 61.04 \(\pm\) 0.11 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 60.96 \(\pm\) 0.05 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 61.45 \(\pm\) 0.11 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 14.26 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 14.50 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) \\ \hline a* & 1.64 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 1.68 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 1.43 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 1.58 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 5.51 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 5.95 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) \\ \hline b* & 11.30 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 12.36 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 10.58 \(\pm\) 0.04 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & 10.85 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & -1.53 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) & -1.38 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{\AA}}\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* For each type of flour, mean values on the same row, not sharing a lowercase superscript letter, are significantly different (\(p<0.05\)). For each WA level, mean values on the same row, not sharing an uppercase superscript letter, are significantly different (\(p<0.05\)).  
\end{table}
Table 4: Properties of bread samples prepared with the Arborio (ARF), Basmati (BRF), and Negro (NRF) rice flours at different water absorption (WA) levels: WA1 of 65% and WA2 necessary to obtain the maximum consistency of 1.1 Nm.  
was noticed on the specific volume of the bread and the texture of the crumb. The best quality bread was obtained using NRF.  
The following supporting information can be downloaded at: [[https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app12094544/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app12094544/s1)]([https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app12094544/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app12094544/s1)), Table S1: Correlations between solvent retention capacity and main chemical components found in the rice flours.  
Conceptualization, I.A. and I.B.; methodology, I.B.; validation, I.A.; formal analysis, I.B.; investigation, I.B. and I.A.; writing--original draft preparation, I.B.; writing--review and editing, I.A.; supervision, I.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  
This research received no external funding.  
Not applicable.  
The authors declare no conflict of interest.