Plant fiber product and process of preparing the same

Abstract

The present disclosure relates to a plant fiber product and a process for preparing the same. The process comprises the steps of providing a plant fiber containing material; humidifying the plant fiber containing material at a relative humidity and a humidifying temperature of less than 100°C to obtain a humidified material; and drying the humidified material to obtain the plant fiber product. The plant fiber product has content of one or more volatile compounds reduced as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product.

Description

PLANT FIBER PRODUCT AND PROCESS OF PREPARING THE SAMECROSS REFERENCE

[0001] This application claims the benefit of United States Provisional Application No. 63 / 572,971, filed April 2, 2024, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.FIELD OF INVENTION

[0002] This invention relates to the field of plant fiber products.BACKGROUND

[0003] Many ingredients refined from plants, such as plant proteins and plant fibers, have undesirable flavor characteristics due to the volatile and relatively small organic compounds bound to the surfaces. The perceived “off-flavor” often limits the application of such ingredients in making food products like baked goods, ready-to-eat cereals, nutrition bars, pasta, and snack foods.

[0004] Many of these ingredients have been through prior aqueous, alkane, or aqueous alcohol processing steps followed by high temperature evaporation processes; however, such ingredients still retain these compounds with undesirable flavors. Other ingredients are processed through dry processes that provide less potential for volatile compound removal. Proteins derived from plants are especially prone to this problem, but some relatively unrefined plant fibers and some animal- derived proteins experience off-flavors as well. Removal of these compounds results in an ingredient that is much less intensely flavored and thus more suitable for use in common foods.

[0005] Therefore, a plant fiber product having a reduced flavor intensity and an improved process for preparing such product are needed.SUMMARY

[0006] The present disclosure provides a process for preparing a plant fiber product comprising the steps of providing a plant fiber containing material; humidifying the plant fiber containing material at a relative humidity and a humidifying temperature of less than 100°C to obtain a humidified material; and drying the humidified material to obtain the plant fiber product. The resulting plant fiber product has a reduced volatile compounds content as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product.

[0007] The present disclosure also provides a process for reducing volatile compound content of a plant fiber product comprising the steps of humidifying a plant fiber containing material at a relative humidity from 50 to 100% and a humidifying temperature of less than 100°C to obtain ahumidified material; and drying the humidified material at a drying temperature from 50 to 90°C to obtain the plant fiber product. The resulting plant fiber product has a reduced volatile compound content as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product.

[0008] The present disclosure also provides a plant fiber product having content of one or more volatile compounds reduced as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product.BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES

[0009] The drawings illustrate generally, by way of example, but not by way of limitation, various aspects discussed in the present document.

[0010] Figure 1 shows a plot of log2(treated / untreated) against loglO(untreated) for fine corn fiber. Results for 40°C are shown on the left. Results for 90°C are shown on the right. Scales are identical in different plots.

[0011] Figure 2 is a log-log plot (log2(treated / untreated) against loglO(treated)) that shows changes in concentrations of volatile compounds, as a function of initial concentration, in the corn bran samples. Numbers in the upper left of each panel represent the treatment condition. The top part of each panel shows that volatile compounds whose relative concentrations are increased because of the treatment, and the bottom part shows that concentrations of volatile compounds are decreased due to the treatment.

[0012] Figure 3 is a log-log plot (log2(treated / untreated) against loglO(treated)) that shows changes in concentrations of volatile compounds, as a function of initial concentration, in the pea internal fiber samples. Numbers in the upper left of each panel represent the treatment condition. The top part of each panel shows that volatile compounds whose relative concentrations are increased because of the treatment, and the bottom part shows that concentrations of volatile compounds are decreased due to the treatment.

[0013] Figure 4 is a log-log plot (log2(treated / untreated) against loglO(treated)) that shows changes in concentrations of volatile compounds, as a function of initial concentration, in the pea hull fiber samples. Numbers in the upper left of each panel represent the treatment condition. The top part of each panel shows that volatile compounds whose relative concentrations are increased because of the treatment, and the bottom part shows that concentrations of volatile compounds are decreased due to the treatment.DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0014] Reference will now be made in detail to certain aspects of the disclosed subject matter. While the disclosed subject matter will be described in conjunction with the enumerated claims,it will be understood that the exemplified subject matter is not intended to limit the claims to the disclosed subject matter.

[0015] Unless defined otherwise, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by one skilled in the art to which this invention belongs. As used herein, each of the following terms has the meaning associated with it as defined below.

[0016] Unless expressly stated, ppm (parts per million), percentage, and ratios are based on a dry weight basis. Percentage based on a dry weight basis is also referred to as wt% below.

[0017] The term "for example," "for instance," "such as," or "including" as used herein is meant to introduce examples that further clarify more general subject matter. Unless otherwise specified, these examples are provided only as an aid for understanding the applications illustrated in the present disclosure and are not meant to be limiting in any fashion.

[0018] As used herein, “room temperature” or “RT” refers to a temperature between 20°C to 25°C.

[0019] In the processes described herein, the acts can be carried out in any order without departing from the principles of the disclosure, except when a temporal or operational sequence is explicitly recited. Furthermore, specified acts can be carried out concurrently unless explicit claim language recites that they be carried out separately. For example, a claimed act of doing X and a claimed act of doing Y can be conducted simultaneously within a single operation, and the resulting process will fall within the literal scope of the claimed process.

[0020] Described herein is a plant fiber product and a process of preparing the plant fiber product. The plant fiber product has less flavor intensity and is suitable for use as a protein source for incorporation into foods for human and / or animal consumption.Process for preparing a plant fiber product

[0021] The present disclosure provides a process for preparing a plant fiber product. The process comprises the steps of humidifying a plant fiber containing material at a relative humidity and a humidifying temperature of less than 100°C to obtain a humidified material; and drying the humidified material to obtain the plant fiber product. The resulting plant fiber product has one or more improved attributes as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product; preferably, the one or more improved attributes may include, but may not be limited to, a reduced volatile compound content.

[0022] As described herein, an “equivalent untreated plant fiber product” refers to an equivalent plant fiber product that has not been subjected to any process of the instant invention as described in the present disclosure. An “equivalent plant fiber product” refers to a plant fiber product prepared from the same starting material used in the instant invention.

[0023] The plant fiber containing material serves as a starting material to the process and can include a plant fiber that may include, but may not be limited to, cereal fiber (e.g., corn fiber, wheat fiber, oat fiber), legume fiber (e.g., soy fiber, pea fiber), and any combinations thereof.

[0024] Preferably, the plant fiber containing material can include a plant fiber obtained from different botanical sources that may include, but may not be limited to, cereal (e.g., com, wheat, oat), legume (e.g., soy, pea), and any combinations thereof.

[0025] In the humidifying step, the plant fiber containing material can be exposed to an atmosphere comprising, preferably a high relative humidity, more preferably a high relative humidity and a high humidifying temperature, to liberate and remove a substantial fraction of compounds (e.g., organic compounds, volatile compounds), which are responsible for causing flavor perceptions. The removed compounds may include, but may not be limited to, organic compounds, volatile compounds, or any combinations thereof. Preferably, moisture content of the resulting humidified material is not increased by the humidifying step.

[0026] In one aspect, the humidifying step at high relative humidity is more effective at elevated humidifying temperatures, but the humidifying temperature is not desirably to exceed 100°C. Preferably, steam is not to be used in the humidifying step to avoid degradation of the starting material.

[0027] Preferably, the atmosphere contacting the plant fiber containing material should be exchanged so that the liberated compounds can be swept away, but air velocity should be kept low enough to prevent the plant fiber containing material itself from being swept away. In other words, the air velocity should be maintained low enough to only remove the liberated compounds but not the plant fiber containing material itself.

[0028] The relative humidity at the humidifying step can be 50%, 60%, 65%, 70%, 75%, 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 99%, or 100%. In one aspect, the relative humidity can be at least 50% or at most 100%. Examples of the relative humidity may include, but may not be limited to, a range from 50 to 100%, from 60 to 100% , from 60 to 99%, from 60 to 90%, from 60 to 80%, from 70 to 100%, from 70 to 99%, from 70 to 90%, or from 70 to 80%.

[0029] The humidifying temperature at the humidifying step can be 55°C, 60°C, 70°C, 80°C, 90°C, or 95°C. In one aspect, the humidifying temperature can be at least 55°C or at most 95°C. Examples of the humidifying temperature may include, but may not be limited to, a range from 55 to 95°C, from 55 to 90°C, from 60 to 95°C, from 60 to 90°C, from 70 to 95 °C, from 70 to 90°C, from 70 to 85°C, or from 70 to 80°C.

[0030] In one aspect, the humidifying step is carried out by passing humidified or warmed air to deliver water to the plant fiber containing material over one or more static beds, or one or more fluid beds. A fluid bed system that can improve air-particle contact and mass transfer may bedesired. Preferably, water is uniformly delivered and distributed over the plant fiber containing material; more preferably, water is delivered in a form of a vapor; even more preferably, water delivered is not in a form of liquid water or not in a form of steam.

[0031] The humidifying period for humidifying the plant fiber containing material is a function of humidifying temperature, relative humidity, surface area of the starting material, particle size of the starting material, or any combinations thereof. In one aspect, the humidifying period can be 10 minutes, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 45 minutes, 60 minutes, 75 minutes, or 90 minutes. For example, the humidifying period can be in a range from 10 to 90 minutes, from 15 to 75 minutes, or from 30 to 60 minutes. In one aspect, the humidifying period can be at most 90 minutes.

[0032] The humidified material can be de-humidified in the drying step to obtain the final plant fiber product. The drying step can be carried out at a drying temperature for a drying period to obtain the plant fiber product. If excess moisture is absorbed by the humidified material, gentle drying can remove the excess moisture and restore and / or establish the desired moisture content in the plant fiber product.

[0033] The drying temperature can be less than 100°C and can be 50°C, 55°C, 60°C, 70°C, 75°C, 85°C, or 90°C. In one aspect, the drying temperature can be at least 50°C or at most 90°C. Examples of the drying temperature may include, but may not be limited to, a range from 50 to 90°C, from 50 to 85°C, from 60 to 90°C, from 60 to 85°C, from 70 to 95°C, from 70 to 90°C, or from 70 to 85°C.

[0034] The drying period can be 5 minutes, 8 minutes, 10 minutes, 15 minutes, 20 minutes, or 25 minutes. For example, the drying period can be in a range from 5 to 25 minutes, from 8 to 20 minutes, from 10 to 15 minutes. In one aspect, the drying period can be at most 5 minutes. In another aspect, the drying period can be at least 25 minutes. In one aspect, the drying period can be at least 5 minutes. In another aspect, the drying period can be at most 25 minutes.

[0035] The relative humidity at the drying step can be 0%, from 0 to 0.5%, from 0.5% to 1%, or at least 1%.

[0036] In one aspect, each of the humidifying step and the drying step can be performed for one or more than one time, preferably for at least two times, more preferably for two times. Preferably, the humidifying step and the drying step can be carried out as a cycle and the cycle can be performed for one or more than one time, preferably for at least two times, more preferably for two times.

[0037] The plant fiber product obtained from the process as described above has content of one or more volatile compounds reduced as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product. Preferably, the content of one or more volatile compounds in the plant fiber product can be reduced by at least 1%, at least 5%, at least 10%, at least 25%, at least 50%, at least 75%, at least 90%, atleast 95%, or at least 98% as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product. More preferably, the content of one or more volatile compounds in the plant fiber product can be reduced by 100% as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product.Process for reducing volatile compound content of a plant fiber product

[0038] The present disclosure provides a process for reducing volatile compounds content of a plant fiber product. Preferably, off-notes of the plant fiber product are reduced by the process of the instant invention.

[0039] As described herein, an “off-note”, “off-taste”, or “off-flavor” is an undesirable and / or unwanted flavor (e.g., taste, odor) present in food products. An “off-note” can be originated from raw materials and / or derived from chemical changes during food processing and storage. Examples of compounds generating “off-note” may include, but may not be limited to, aldehydes, ketones, alcohols, carboxylic acids, sulfur-containing compounds, heterocyclic compounds, or other small volatile compounds.

[0040] The process comprises a step of humidifying a plant fiber containing material at a relative humidity from 50 to 100% and a humidifying temperature of less than 100°C to obtain a humidified material. The humidified material is then dried at a drying temperature from 50 to 90°C to obtain the plant fiber product. The resulting plant fiber product has content of one or more volatile compounds reduced by at least 1%, at least 5%, at least 10%, at least 25%, at least 50%, at least 75%, at least 90%, at least 95%, or at least 98% as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product. Preferably, the resulting plant fiber product has content of one or more volatile compounds reduced by 100% as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product; in other words, the resulting plant fiber product can be completely free of one or more volatile compounds.

[0041] The plant fiber containing material can include a plant fiber obtained from different botanical sources that may include, but may not be limited to, cereal (e.g., com, wheat, oat), legume (e.g., soy, pea), and any combinations thereof.

[0042] During the humidifying step, the plant fiber containing material is humidified at a relative humidity in a range from 50 to 100%, from 60 to 99%, or from 70 to 99%, and at a humidifying temperature in a range from 55 to 95°C, from 60 to 95°C, or from 70 to 95°C. The plant fiber containing material is humidified for a humidifying period in a range from 10 to 90 minutes, from 15 to 75 minutes, or from 30 to 60 minutes.

[0043] The humidified material is dried at a drying temperature in a range from 50 to 90°C, from 60 to 90°C, or from 70 to 90°C, for a drying period in a range from 5 to 25 minutes, from 8 to 20 minutes, or from 10 to 15 minutes to obtain the plant fiber product.

[0044] In one aspect, each of the humidifying step and the drying step can be performed for one or more than one time, preferably for at least two times, more preferably for two times. Preferably, the humidifying step and the drying step can be carried out as a cycle and the cycle can be performed for one or more than one time, preferably for at least two times, more preferably for two times.

[0045] In one aspect, no purification step may be required to separate starch out from the plant fiber containing material before the material is fed to the process. In another aspect, no enzymatic step may be required in any process of the instant invention described in the present disclosure.

[0046] In another aspect, no alcohol washing step may be required in any process of the instant invention described in the present disclosure.Plant fiber product

[0047] The plant fiber product of the present invention has content of one or more volatile compounds reduced as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product. Thus, the plant fiber product may have one or more off-notes partially or completely removed. In other words, the content of one or more volatile compounds in the plant fiber product described in this disclosure is reduced, preferably completely eliminated, as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product. Volatile compounds are substances present in a plant fiber product that may impart a flavor (e.g., an earthy flavor, a savory flavor, a meaty flavor, a brothy flavor, a grainy flavor, a cereal flavor, a malty flavor, a toasted flavor, a beany flavor, a green flavor, or any combinations thereof) to the product. Examples of the volatile compounds may include, but may not be limited to, furan, pyran, organic acid, aldehyde, alcohol, ketone, pyrazine, lactone, thiol, sulfide, or any combinations thereof.

[0048] In one aspect, the plant fiber product of the present invention has content of one or more volatile compounds reduced by at least 1%, at least 5%, at least 10%, at least 25%, at least 50%, at least 75%, at least 90%, at least 95%, or at least 98% as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product. Preferably, the plant fiber product has content of one or more volatile compounds reduced by 100% as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product.

[0049] Preferably, the plant fiber product of the present invention may be prepared by any process described in the present disclosure.

[0050] In one aspect, attributes other than the volatile compound content of the plant fiber product prepared by any process of the instant invention described in the present disclosure may be improved as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product.Examples

[0051] The invention is further described in detail by reference to the following experimental examples. These examples are provided for purposes of illustration only and are not intended to be limiting unless otherwise specified. Thus, the invention should in no way be construed as being limited to the following examples, but rather should be construed to encompass any and all variations which become evident as a result of the teaching provided herein.Example 11.1. Materials and Method

[0052] A cereal fiber, fine corn fiber (Cargill Incorporated), was being treated in this study. About 5g of the fine corn fiber was weighed into a pre-weighed aluminum weighing dish. Triplicate samples were placed in a Combi-oven for 60 minutes at 40°C or 90°C and 100% relative humidity (humidified samples). A matching set of samples was prepared (reference samples), and both the treated samples and reference samples were placed in the Combi-oven for 20 minutes at 80°C and 0% relative humidity to obtain treated samples and dried-only samples, respectively. One untreated sample, three treated samples, and three dried-only samples were placed in gas-tight vials and stored in the dark at room temperature until analysis.1.2. Results and Discussion1.2.1 Humidification

[0053] Samples gained an average from about 6% to about 8% moisture in the humidification phase (about 7.7% at 40°C and about 6.2% at 90°C). Samples gained; this was significantly different (a=0.008) and presumably due to less condensation of moisture at higher temperature in samples that absorbed less moisture.1.2.2 Untargeted GC / MS Analysis

[0054] General effects of treatments on volatile compounds in the samples can be detected using untargeted GC / MS methods. For example, general changes to the population of volatile compounds can be detected by the untargeted GC / MS methods. Such volatile compounds may be responsible for carrying flavors (e.g., off-note flavors). This approach is based on the fingerprinting of volatile compounds via gas chromatography (GC) and mass spectrometric (MS) identification. The overall purpose is to look at the volatile composition of the various samples and compare the different experimental treatments to look for differences and patterns.

[0055] Not all these volatile compounds influence flavor. The flavor experience may be the consequence of concentrations and ratios of volatile compounds that individually would not seem to be relevant or prominent but together produce a flavor experience.

[0056] Though untargeted GC / MS does not provide exact quantitative data, it does provide relative comparative potential. Every compound identified has an associated area count, which is the mass abundance of the fragment ions from the compounds, which can be a relative proxy for concentration. Since different compounds have different sensitivities, one compound cannot be compared to another, but one compound can be compared to itself provided a similar mass fragmentation process was conducted across the samples. Even in this case, the responsiveness may not be perfectly linear, but it is approximately linear.

[0057] A simple way of comparing treatments is to count the number of volatile compounds that show a greater than 2-fold concentration change as a result of the treatments. Table 1 shows that dozens to hundreds of compounds can change in concentration by at least 2-fold (up or down) and show a significant difference (alpha<0.05) from the untreated sample.Table 1*H&D indicates humidified and dried treatment (i.e., treated samples)**OD indicates dried only treatment (i.e., dried-only samples)

[0058] A plot of the change in concentration versus the initial concentration illustrates the relationship between the direction and extent of change and the initial concentration (Figure 1). Data was included in this Figure 1 if there was a significant difference between the treatment and the untreated samples - irrespective of the size of the difference. There were numerous instances in which statistically significant change occurred (meaning the change had low variance) even though the relative difference between treatments was small.

[0059] The full range of change was set to show all results in terms of doubling. An observation of -2 on this scale represents about 75% decrease, so many of these “small” changes were actually large. Generally, deeper decreases were observed in the humidified and dried cases compared to the only-dried cases. Again generally, the greatest increases were associated with compounds with low initial concentrations while the greatest decreases were observed in the compounds initially at moderate to high concentration.

[0060] The overall approach to data analysis used here allows a comparison of the direction of movement of individual compounds in the two treatment conditions. Table 2 shows the percent of compounds that were decreased in both treatments or increased in both treatments (with a<0.05). The “Total” data reflected the entire set of compounds selected for analysis. The data was sortedby the peak area of the compounds in the untreated sample - the bottom 10% by area was excluded (the subsequent results are reflected as “Top90”). The data suggests that humidification & drying is not simply an intensification of the effect of drying alone. Potentially, humidification invokes a different mechanism of action that does not operate in a dry environment.

[0061] When treated at 40°C, there were more compounds increased in concentrations than compounds decreased in concentrations. In contrast, at 90°C, both treatments caused more compounds to have concentrations decreased. However, this was still a small subset of compounds decreased by humidification and drying at 90°C (as compared with Table 1).Table 2Example 22.1 Materials and Method

[0062] About 5g samples of corn bran (Cargill Incorporated) were weighed and placed in shallow aluminum weigh boats. Then, the samples were treated by a humidifying step and a drying step. Boats were placed in an Cheftop combi oven set for the humidification conditions described in Table 3. The samples were heated in the oven for 12 minutes at 70°C and 0% relative humidity to remove water. After the drying step, the treated samples were exactly weighed, placed in vials and frozen until analysis.

[0063] Initial sample moisture was estimated using quadruplicate measurements with a moisture balance.Table 3

[0064] For sensory analysis, single samples of about 40g corn bran were placed in larger aluminum pans and exposed to the same humidification conditions described in Table 3. After humidification, the treated samples were transferred to mylar bags and frozen without any drying.

[0065] A reference curve was created by suspending untreated material at a concentration of 7.0% in water and allowing the suspension to steep at room temperature for about 10 minutes. The suspension was then centrifuged, and the supernatant pulled through a 0.2-micron polyethersulfone (PES) membrane in a sterile vessel. Reference standards of 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 3.0, and 5.0% were prepared by serially diluting the 7.0% stock solution with water. These samples were tasted blindly and independently by a trained panel (12 people) who were asked to place the reference standards on a line scale. The panel did not specifically know what the standards represented. The panel leader then reviewed the data looking for panel agreement on sample intensity rank order and the software assigned numerical values (0-100). The data from panelists that were deemed outliers were removed and an average of the assigned numerical values was taken for the remaining panelists. Those average values then became the scale values (0-100) for the reference standards and were anchored on the line accordingly for the remainder of the tests.

[0066] The panel was then given three sets of samples which included four blind untreated samples and the treated samples. The four blind untreated samples (known to the scientists: 0.75%, 1.5%, 3.0% and 5.0%) were prepared by diluting the 7.0% stock solution with water and were used to ensure the panel was aligned and could reproduce their data. The treated samples were prepared at 5.0% concentration. After tasting a sample, the panelists were asked to place the sample on the scale based on intensity, using the scale anchors they established in the previous step. With each set of samples, the panel leader used the blind samples to ensure that the panel showed agreement and alignment with the established standards before progressing to the next set of samples. The placement on the line scale provided an output of an intensity measurement that was an overall specific intensity value, which reflects that the panel is assessing the intensity level of the treated samples compared to the intensity of the reference anchors created from the same untreated material.2.2 Results and Discussion2,2, 1 Sensory analysis

[0067] The panel successfully placed blind references at the appropriate flavor intensity relative to the established scale. Table 4 below shows the relationship between treatment conditions, perceived flavor intensity, and equivalent concentration of treated solutions of com bran. Some treatments showed a reduction of the overall flavor intensity values (in scale of 0 to 100: with 0being the least intense and 100 being the most intense) measured by the sensory panel. For example, treatment conditions 4 and 5 achieved a decrease in flavor intensity equivalent about 35% decrease in the overall flavor intensity.Table 42,2,2 Untargeted GC / MS analysis

[0068] General effects of treatments on volatile compounds can be detected using untargeted GC / MS methods. For example, general changes to the population of volatile compounds can be detected by the untargeted GC / MS methods. Such volatile compounds may be responsible for carrying flavors (e.g., off-note flavors). This approach is based on the fingerprinting of volatile compounds via gas chromatography (GC) and mass spectrometric (MS) identification. The overall purpose is to look at the volatile composition of the various samples and compare the different experimental treatments to look for differences and patterns.

[0069] Though untargeted GC / MS does not provide exact quantitative data, it does provide relative comparative potential. Every compound identified has an associated area count, which is the mass abundance of the fragment ions from the compounds, which can be a relative proxy for concentration. Since different compounds have different sensitivities, one compound cannot be compared to another, but one compound can be compared to itself provided a similar mass fragmentation process was conducted across the samples. Even in this case, the responsiveness may not be perfectly linear, but it is approximately linear.

[0070] Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was performed on both pre-drying and post-drying samples in order to investigate the impact of treatment conditions on the concentration of unidentified compounds. The results showed that the high temperature and high humidity treatment caused the samples to be distinctly different from the other treatment conditions, leading to a different fingerprint of volatile compounds. Further analysis revealed that a larger number ofvolatiles that were decreased in relative concentration caused the high temperature and high humidity samples to cluster differently.

[0071] Figure 2 shows the effect of treatment on the profile of volatile compounds, in which compounds that showed less than 2-fold change were excluded from the visualization. A total of about 468 compounds were identified in the samples. Generally, many more compounds were decreased in concentration than increased. Increased concentrations were more likely to arise from compounds that were in low concentration in the untreated sample.

[0072] One further way to understand the effect of treatment is to count the number of volatile compounds that show two-fold concentration decreases (down) or increases (up). Table 5 shows how most treatment conditions favor decreasing concentrations over increasing concentrations, and how high relative humidity treatment favor the concentration decrease the most.Table 52,2,3 Targeted GC / FID analysis

[0073] Samples of treated and untreated samples were analyzed for about 25 analytes using a calibrated GC / FID method. Not all compounds in the calibration set appear in the samples. Table 6 shows the distribution of calibrated compounds in the untreated samples. About 98% of the mass of these compounds are associated with hexanal, 2-ethyl-l -hexanol, 2-ethyl-6-methyl-pyrazine, 4-methyl-l -pentanol, l-octen-3-ol, 2-pentyl-furan, 1 -pentanol, heptanal, benzaldehyde, 4-ethyl- benzaldehyde, and 2-heptenal. Because different compounds have quite different flavor and aroma potencies, this does not mean that the sensory experience depends on just these compounds. An integrated flavor perception might be more dependent on the combination and concentrations of compounds than concentration of any single compound. In any event, it may be important to understand that overall chemical response may be dominated by a subset of the compounds present and analyzed.Table 6

[0074] The treatment process drastically reduces volatile compounds and can change the overall composition of these individual volatile compounds. Table 7 shows the com bran volatile composition (of tracked compounds) after humidifying at 90°C at 100% RH for 60 minutes. The dominance of hexanal in the composition has diminished and other minor compounds are more resistant to removal and have increased comparatively, such as benzaldehyde and octanal.Table 7

[0075] Tables 8 and 9 show the percentage reduction of major volatile compounds after treatment as compared to the untreated samples. For the treatment producing Table 11, hexanal was removed at 71.4%, while benzaldehyde and l-octen-3-ol were more resistant to removal at 16.4% and 0.4%, respectively.

[0076] The “All Peaks” column refers to the sum of all detected volatile species in the sample, both calibrated and uncalibrated. This is indicative of the total volatile composition change, regardless of individual compounds decreasing or increasing at a given processing condition.Table 8Table 9

[0077] Table 10 shows the simple correlation coefficients between the humidifying temperature, relative humidity (RH), and humidifying period and the observed concentrations of compounds after the treatment. “All peaks” is a sum of all peaks detected, both calibrated and not, including the entire volatile composition of the sample. Correlations show that relative humidity has the largest impact on reduction in volatile species. Humidifying temperature has a negative correlation for most compounds, showing that lower humidifying temperature results in higher reductions.Table 102,2,4 Conclusion

[0078] The following observations can be drawn from the above studies:

[0079] - Relative humidity was positively correlated to most volatile compound reduction, showing higher relative humidity resulted in greater reduction of volatile compounds.

[0080] - Humidifying temperature was negatively correlated to most volatile compound reduction, showing lower humidifying temperature resulted in greater reduction of volatile compounds.

[0081] - Treatment condition of high humidifying temperature and low relative humidity (90°C / 60RH) had the lowest volatile compound reduction as seen in the GC / FID and GC / MS analyses.Example 33.1 Materials and Method

[0082] Approximately 75g samples of pea internal fiber (Cargill Incorporated) were weighed on a metal tray. Then, the samples were treated by a humidifying step and a drying step. The samples were placed in a Cheftop combi oven set for the humidification conditions described in Table 11. The samples were heated in the oven for 10 to 15 minutes at 75°C and 0% relative humidity to remove water. After the drying step, the treated samples were exactly weighed, placed in mylar bags and frozen until analysis.

[0083] Sample moisture was measured using measurements with a moisture balance.Table 11

[0084] For sensory evaluation, a reference curve was created by suspending untreated material at a concentration of 7.0% in water and allowing the suspension to steep at room temperature for about 10 minutes. The suspension was then centrifuged, and the supernatant pulled through a 0.2- micron polyethersulfone (PES) membrane in a sterile vessel. Reference standards of 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 3.0, and 5.0% were prepared by serially diluting the 7.0% stock solution with water. These samples were tasted blindly and independently by a trained panel (12 people) who were asked to place the reference standards on a line scale. The panel did not specifically know what the standards represented. The panel leader then reviewed the data looking for panel agreement on sample intensity rank order and the software assigned numerical values (0-100). The data from panelists that were deemed outliers were removed and an average of the assigned numerical values was taken for the remaining panelists. Those average values then became the scale values (0-100) for the reference standards and were anchored on the line accordingly for the remainder of the tests.

[0085] The panel was then given three sets of samples which included four blind untreated samples and the treated samples. The four blind untreated samples (known to the scientists: 0.25%, 1.5%, 4.0% and 5.0%) were prepared by diluting the 7.0% stock solution with water and were used to ensure the panel was aligned and could reproduce their data. The treated samples were prepared at 5.0% concentration. After tasting a sample, the panelists were asked to place the sample on the scale based on intensity, using the scale anchors they established in the previous step. With each set of samples, the panel leader used the blind samples to ensure that the panel showed agreement and alignment with the established standards before progressing to the next set of samples. The placement on the line scale provided an output of an intensity measurement that was an overall specific intensity value, which reflects that the panel is assessing the intensity level of the treated samples compared to the intensity of the reference anchors created from the same untreated material.3.2 Results and Discussion3,2, 1 Sensory analysis

[0086] The panel successfully placed blind references at the appropriate flavor intensity relative to the established scale. Table 12 below shows the relationship between treatment conditions, perceived flavor intensity, and equivalent concentration of treated solutions of pea internal fiber.Some treatments had a significant effect of the overall flavor intensity values (in scale of 0 to 100: with 0 being the least intense and 100 being the most intense) measured by the sensory panel. For example, treatment conditions 2 and 3 appeared to be the most effective in reducing flavor intensity with an equivalent of about 73% decrease in the overall flavor intensity.Table 123,2,2 Untargeted GC / MS analysis

[0087] General effects of treatments on volatile compounds can be detected using untargeted GC / MS methods. For example, general changes to the population of volatile compounds can be detected by the untargeted GC / MS methods. Such volatile compounds may be responsible for carrying flavors (e.g., off-note flavors). This approach is based on the fingerprinting of volatile compounds via gas chromatography (GC) and mass spectrometric (MS) identification. The overall purpose is to look at the volatile composition of the various samples and compare the different experimental treatments to look for differences and patterns.

[0088] Though untargeted GC / MS does not provide exact quantitative data, it does provide relative comparative potential. Every compound identified has an associated area count, which is the mass abundance of the fragment ions from the compounds, which can be a relative proxy for concentration. Since different compounds have different sensitivities, one compound cannot be compared to another, but one compound can be compared to itself provided a similar mass fragmentation process was conducted across the samples. Even in this case, the responsiveness may not be perfectly linear, but it is approximately linear.

[0089] Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was performed on both pre-drying and post-drying samples in order to investigate the impact of treatment conditions on the concentration of unidentified compounds. The results showed that the high temperature and high humidity treatment caused the samples to be distinctly different from the other treatment conditions, leadingto a different fingerprint of volatile compounds. Further analysis revealed that a larger number of volatiles that were decreased in relative concentration caused the high temperature and high humidity samples to cluster differently.

[0090] Figure 3 shows the effect of treatment on the profile of volatile compounds, in which compounds that showed less than 2-fold change were excluded from the visualization. A total of about 1,670 compounds were identified in the samples. Generally, many more compounds were decreased in concentration than increased. Increased concentrations were more likely to arise from compounds that were in low concentration in the untreated sample.

[0091] One further way to understand the effect of treatment is to count the number of volatile compounds that show two-fold concentration decreases (down) or increases (up). Table 13 shows how most treatment conditions favor decreasing concentrations over increasing concentrations. For example, treatment condition 2 favors the concentration decrease the most.Table 133,2,3 Targeted GC / FID analysis

[0092] Samples of treated and untreated samples were analyzed for about 25 analytes using a calibrated GC / FID method. Not all compounds in the calibration set appear in the samples. Table 14 shows the distribution of calibrated compounds in the untreated samples. About 91% of the mass of these compounds are associated with hexanal, 2-ethyl-l -hexanol, 2-pentyl-furan, benzaldehyde, 2-ethyl-6-methyl-pyrazine, l-octen-3-ol, 4-methyl-l -pentanol, 2-hexanol, 2- heptenal, 4-ethyl-benzaldehyde, and octanal. Because different compounds have quite different flavor and aroma potencies, this does not mean that the sensory experience depends on just these compounds. An integrated flavor perception might be more dependent on the combination and concentrations of compounds than concentration of any single compound. In any event, it may be important to understand that overall chemical response may be dominated by a subset of the compounds present and analyzed.Table 14

[0093] The treatment process drastically reduces volatile compounds and can change the overall composition of these individual volatile compounds. Table 15 shows the pea internal fiber volatile composition (of tracked compounds) after humidifying at 90°C at 100% RH for 60 minutes. The dominance of hexanal in the composition has diminished and other minor compounds are more resistant to removal and have increased comparatively, such as l-octen-3-ol and octanal.Table 15

[0094] Tables 16 and 17 show the percentage reduction of major volatile compounds after treatment as compared to the untreated samples. For the treatment producing Table 15, hexanal was removed at 79.7%, while l-octen-3-ol and octanal were more resistant to removal at 22.6% and 12.0%, respectively.

[0095] The “All Peaks” column refers to the sum of all detected volatile species in the sample, both calibrated and uncalibrated. This is indicative of the total volatile composition change, regardless of individual compounds decreasing or increasing at a given processing condition.Table 16Table 17

[0096] Table 18 shows the simple correlation coefficients between the humidifying temperature, relative humidity (RH), and the observed concentrations of volatile compounds after the treatment. “All peaks” is a sum of all peaks detected, both calibrated and not, including the entire volatile composition of the sample. Correlations show that relative humidity has the largest impact on reduction in volatile species. Humidifying temperature has a negative correlation to the compounds, showing that lower humidifying temperature results in higher reductions.Table 18

[0097] Table 19 shows the correlation coefficients between the overall intensity reduction of the sensory results compared to each individual volatile compound’s concentration reduction. Most quantitated volatile compounds showed a strongly positive correlation between concentration reduction and sensory intensity reduction. Only two compounds, 2-hexanol and 4-m ethyl- 1- pentanol, showed a poor or negative correlation. It can be assumed that these two compounds do not participate strongly in the overall flavor intensity of these samples.Table 193,2.4 Conclusion

[0098] The following observations can be drawn from the above studies:

[0099] - Exposure of pea internal fiber to high humidifying temperature and relative humidity can significantly decrease the overall flavor intensity of the ingredient.

[0100] - The decline in flavor intensity was not easily related to a change in any single volatile compound, but most of the quantitated volatile compounds correlated well with the flavor intensity reduction.

[0101] - A large number of volatile compounds decreased in concentration as indicated by untargeted GC / MS analysis. A relatively small number of compounds increased in concentration.

[0102] - The changes in concentration found in untargeted analyses were dominated by the change in concentration of the more prominent compounds.

[0103] - Most volatile compounds tracked in quantitative analysis showed sensitivity to conditions during humidification. Generally, high relative humidity favored decreased concentrations after drying.

[0104] - Most compounds had a negative correlation to humidifying temperature, showing greater removal at lower humidifying temperature.

[0105] - The largest removal of volatile compounds was found at the high humidifying temperature and high relative humidity condition.Example 44.1 Materials and Method

[0106] Approximately 75g samples of pea hull fiber (Cargill Incorporated) were weighed on a metal tray. Then, the samples were treated by a humidifying step and a drying step. The samples were placed in a Cheftop combi oven set for the humidification conditions described in Table 20. The samples were heated in the oven for 10 to 15 minutes at 75°C and 0% relative humidity to remove water. After the drying step, the treated samples were exactly weighed, placed in mylar bags and frozen until analysis.

[0107] Sample moisture was measured using measurements with a moisture balance.Table 20

[0108] For sensory evaluation, a reference curve was created by suspending untreated material at a concentration of 7.0% in water and allowing the suspension to steep at room temperature for about 10 minutes. The suspension was then centrifuged, and the supernatant pulled through a 0.2- micron polyethersulfone (PES) membrane in a sterile vessel. Reference standards of 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 3.0, and 5.0% were prepared by serially diluting the 7.0% stock solution with water. These samples were tasted blindly and independently by a trained panel (12 people) who were asked to place the reference standards on a line scale. The panel did not specifically know what the standards represented. The panel leader then reviewed the data looking for panel agreement on sample intensity rank order and the software assigned numerical values (0-100). The data from panelists that were deemed outliers were removed and an average of the assigned numerical values was taken for the remaining panelists. Those average values then became the scale values (0-100) for the reference standards and were anchored on the line accordingly for the remainder of the tests.

[0109] The panel was then given three sets of samples which included four blind untreated samples and the treated samples. The four blind untreated samples (known to the scientists: 0.25%, 1.5%, 4.0% and 5.0%) were prepared by diluting the 7.0% stock solution with water and were used to ensure the panel was aligned and could reproduce their data. The treated samples were prepared at 5.0% concentration. After tasting a sample, the panelists were asked to place the sample on the scale based on intensity, using the scale anchors they established in the previousstep. With each set of samples, the panel leader used the blind samples to ensure that the panel showed agreement and alignment with the established standards before progressing to the next set of samples. The placement on the line scale provided an output of an intensity measurement that was an overall specific intensity value, which reflects that the panel is assessing the intensity level of the treated samples compared to the intensity of the reference anchors created from the same untreated material.4.2 Results and Discussion4,2, 1 Sensory analysis

[0110] The panel successfully placed blind references at the appropriate flavor intensity relative to the established scale. Table 21 below shows the relationship between treatment conditions, perceived flavor intensity, and equivalent concentration of treated solutions of pea hull fiber. Some treatments had a significant effect of the overall flavor intensity values (in scale of 0 to 100: with 0 being the least intense and 100 being the most intense) measured by the sensory panel. For example, treatment condition 2 appeared to be the most effective in reducing flavor intensity with an equivalent of about 76% decrease in the overall flavor intensity.Table 214,2,2 Untargeted GC / MS analysis[OHl] General effects of treatments on volatile compounds can be detected using untargeted GC / MS methods. For example, general changes to the population of volatile compounds can be detected by the untargeted GC / MS methods. Such volatile compounds may be responsible for carrying flavors (e.g., off-note flavors). This approach is based on the fingerprinting of volatile compounds via gas chromatography (GC) and mass spectrometric (MS) identification. The overallpurpose is to look at the volatile composition of the various samples and compare the different experimental treatments to look for differences and patterns.

[0112] Though untargeted GC / MS does not provide exact quantitative data, it does provide relative comparative potential. Every compound identified has an associated area count, which is the mass abundance of the fragment ions from the compounds, which can be a relative proxy for concentration. Since different compounds have different sensitivities, one compound cannot be compared to another, but one compound can be compared to itself provided a similar mass fragmentation process was conducted across the samples. Even in this case, the responsiveness may not be perfectly linear, but it is approximately linear.

[0113] Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was performed on both pre-drying and post-drying samples in order to investigate the impact of treatment conditions on the concentration of unidentified compounds. The results showed that the high temperature and high humidity treatment caused the samples to be distinctly different from the other treatment conditions, leading to a different fingerprint of volatile compounds. Further analysis revealed that a larger number of volatiles that were decreased in relative concentration caused the high temperature and high humidity samples to cluster differently.

[0114] Figure 4 shows the effect of treatment on the profile of volatile compounds, in which compounds that showed less than 2-fold change were excluded from the visualization. A total of about 1,940 compounds were identified in the samples. Generally, many more compounds were decreased in concentration than increased. Increased concentrations were more likely to arise from compounds that were in low concentration in the untreated sample.

[0115] One further way to understand the effect of treatment is to count the number of volatile compounds that show two-fold concentration decreases (down) or increases (up). Table 22 shows how most treatment conditions favor decreasing concentrations over increasing concentrations. For example, treatment condition 2 removed the highest number of the volatiles from the hull fiber samples.Table 224,2.3 Targeted GC / FID analysis

[0116] Samples of treated and untreated samples were analyzed for about 25 analytes using a calibrated GC / FID method. Not all compounds in the calibration set appear in the samples. Table 23 shows the distribution of calibrated compounds in the untreated samples. About 95% of the mass of these compounds are associated with hexanal, 2-heptenal, 2-ethyl-6-methyl-pyrazine, 2- ethyl-1 -hexanol, and octanal. Because different compounds have quite different flavor and aroma potencies, this does not mean that the sensory experience depends on just these compounds. An integrated flavor perception might be more dependent on the combination and concentrations of compounds than concentration of any single compound. In any event, it may be important to understand that overall chemical response may be dominated by a subset of the compounds present and analyzed.Table 23

[0117] The treatment process drastically reduces volatile compounds and can change the overall composition of these individual volatile compounds. Table 24 shows the pea hull fiber volatile composition (of tracked compounds) after humidifying at 90°C at 100% RH for 60 minutes. The dominance of hexanal in the composition has diminished and other minor compounds are more resistant to removal and have increased comparatively, such as 2-ethyl-6-methyl-pyrazine and octanal.Table 24

[0118] Tables 25 and 26 show the percentage reduction of major volatile compounds after treatment as compared to the untreated samples. For the treatment producing Table 13, hexanal was removed at 98.5%, while 2-ethyl-6-methyl-pyrazine and octanal were more resistant to removal at 40.6% and 57.8%, respectively.

[0119] The “All Peaks” column refers to the sum of all detected volatile species in the sample, both calibrated and uncalibrated. This is indicative of the total volatile composition change, regardless of individual compounds decreasing or increasing at a given processing condition.Table 25Table 26

[0120] Table 27 shows the simple correlation coefficients between the humidifying temperature, relative humidity (RH), and the observed concentrations of volatile compounds after the treatment.“All peaks” is a sum of all peaks detected, both calibrated and not, including the entire volatile composition of the sample.Table 27

[0121] Table 28 shows the correlation coefficients between the overall intensity reduction of the sensory results compared to each individual volatile compound’s concentration reduction. Most quantitated volatile compounds showed a strongly positive correlation between concentration reduction and sensory intensity reduction. Only seven compounds, 2-4-decadienal, o- tolualdehyde, 2-hexanone, 2-octanone, 2-hexanol, 1 -pentanol, and thiophene, showed a poor or negative correlation. It can be assumed that these two compounds do not participate strongly in the overall flavor intensity of these samples.Table 284,2.4 Conclusion

[0122] The following observations can be drawn from the above studies:

[0123] - Exposure of pea hull fiber to high humidifying temperature and relative humidity can significantly decrease the overall flavor intensity of the ingredient.

[0124] - The decline in flavor intensity was not easily related to a change in any single volatile compound, but reductions of many volatile compounds were strongly correlated to the flavor intensity reduction.

[0125] - A large number of volatile compounds decreased in concentration as indicated by untargeted GC / MS analysis. A relatively small number of compounds increased in concentration.

[0126] - The changes in concentration found in untargeted analyses were dominated by the change in concentration of the more prominent compounds.

[0127] - The concentration of most quantitated compounds (from GC / FID analysis using quantitative standards) was positively correlated with both humidifying temperature and relative humidity, in which higher humidifying temperature and higher relative humidity resulted in greater volatiles losses.

[0128] - Many volatile compounds were positively correlated to overall flavor intensity reduction.Clauses describing the invention

[0129] Clause 1. A process for preparing a plant fiber product, comprising the steps of: a. providing a plant fiber containing material; b. humidifying the plant fiber containing material at a relative humidity and a humidifying temperature of less than 100°C to obtain a humidified material; and c. drying the humidified material to obtain the plant fiber product; wherein the plant fiber product has a reduced volatile compound content as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product.

[0130] Clause 2. The process of clause 1, wherein the plant fiber containing material comprises plant fiber selected from the group consisting of cereal fiber, legume fiber, and any combinations thereof.

[0131] Clause 3. The process of any of the preceding clauses, wherein the plant fiber containing material comprises plant fiber selected from the group consisting of corn fiber, wheat fiber, oat fiber, soy fiber, pea fiber, and any combinations thereof.

[0132] Clause 4. The process of any of the preceding clauses, wherein the relative humidity in the humidifying step is in a range from 50 to 100%.

[0133] Clause 5. The process of any of the preceding clauses, wherein the humidifying temperature is in a range from 55 to 95°C.

[0134] Clause 6. The process of any of the preceding clauses, wherein the humidifying temperature is less than 100°C.

[0135] Clause 7. The process of any of the preceding clauses, wherein the plant fiber containing material is humidified for a humidifying period in a range from 10 to 90 minutes, from 15 to 75 minutes, or 30 to 60 minutes.

[0136] Clause 8. The process of any of the preceding clauses, wherein in the humidifying step, the relative humidity is in a range from 60 to 100%, the humidifying temperature is in a range from 60 to 90°C; and the humidifying period is in a range from 30 to 90 minutes.

[0137] Clause 9. The process of any of the preceding clauses, wherein water is uniformly delivered and distributed over the plant fiber containing material in the humidifying step.

[0138] Clause 10. The process of any of the preceding clauses, water delivered in the humidifying step is in a form of a liquid water or a vapor.

[0139] Clause 11. The process of any of the preceding clauses, water delivered in the humidifying step is not in a form of steam.

[0140] Clause 12. The process of any of the preceding clauses, wherein the humidified material is dried at drying temperature in a range from 50 to 90°C.

[0141] Clause 13. The process of any of the preceding clauses, wherein the humidified material is dried for a drying period in a range from 5 to 25 minutes, from 8 to 20 minutes, or from 10 to 15 minutes.

[0142] Clause 14. The process of any of the preceding clauses, wherein each of the humidifying step and the drying step is performed for one or more than one time, preferably for at least two times, more preferably for two times.

[0143] Clause 15. A process for reducing volatile compound content of a plant fiber product, comprising the steps of: a. humidifying a plant fiber containing material at a relative humidity from 50 to 100% and a humidifying temperature of less than 100°C to obtain a humidified material; and b. drying the humidified material at a drying temperature from 50 to 90°C to obtain the plant fiber product; wherein the plant fiber product has a reduced volatile compound content as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product.

[0144] Clause 16. A process for reducing volatile compound content of a plant fiber product, consisting of the steps of: a. humidifying a plant fiber containing material at a relative humidity from 50 to 100% and a humidifying temperature of less than 100°C to obtain a humidified material; and b. drying the humidified material at a drying temperature from 50 to 90°C to obtain the plant fiber product; wherein the plant fiber product has a reduced volatile compound content as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product.

[0145] Clause 17. The process of any of clauses 15 to 16, wherein the plant fiber containing material comprises plant fiber selected from the group consisting of cereal fiber, legume fiber, and any combinations thereof.

[0146] Clause 18. The process of any of clauses 15 to 17, wherein the plant fiber containing material comprises plant fiber selected from the group consisting of corn fiber, wheat fiber, oat fiber, soy fiber, pea fiber, and any combinations thereof.

[0147] Clause 19. The process of any of clauses 15 to 18, wherein the humidifying step is performed at a humidifying temperature in a range from 55 to 95°C

[0148] Clause 20. The process of any of the clauses 15 to 19, wherein the corn fiber containing material is humidified for a humidifying period in a range from 10 to 90 minutes, from 15 to 75 minutes, or 30 to 60 minutes.

[0149] Clause 21. The process of any of the clauses 15 to 20, wherein in the humidifying step, the relative humidity is in a range from 60 to 100%, the humidifying temperature is in a range from 60 to 90°C; and the humidifying period is in a range from 30 to 90 minutes.

[0150] Clause 22. The process of any of clauses 15 to 21, wherein water is uniformly delivered and distributed over the corn fiber containing material in the humidifying step.

[0151] Clause 23. The process of any of clauses 15 to 22, water delivered in the humidifying step is in a form of a liquid water or a vapor.

[0152] Clause 24. The process of any of clauses 15 to 23, water delivered in the humidifying step is not in a form of steam.

[0153] Clause 25. The process of any of clauses 15 to 24, wherein the humidified material is dried at a drying temperature in a range from 50 to 90°C.

[0154] Clause 26. The process of any of clauses 15 to 25, wherein the humidified material is dried for a drying period in a range from 5 to 25 minutes, from 8 to 20 minutes, or from 10 to 15 minutes.

[0155] Clause 27. The process of any of clauses 15 to 26, wherein each of the humidifying step and the drying step is performed for one or more than one time, preferably for at least two times, more preferably for two times.

[0156] Clause 28. The process of any of the preceding clauses, wherein the corn fiber product has content of one or more volatile compounds reduced by a range from 20 to 100%, preferably from 55 to 100%, more preferably from 70 to 100%, as compared to an equivalent untreated com fiber product.

[0157] Clause 29. A plant fiber product prepared by the process of any of the preceding claims.

[0158] Clause 30. A plant fiber product having content of one or more volatile compounds reduced as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product.

Claims

CLAIMSWhat is claimed is:

1. A process for preparing a plant fiber product, comprising the steps of: a. providing a plant fiber containing material; b. humidifying the plant fiber containing material at a relative humidity and a humidifying temperature of less than 100°C to obtain a humidified material; and c. drying the humidified material to obtain the plant fiber product; wherein the plant fiber product has a reduced volatile compound content as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product.

2. The process of claim 1, wherein the plant fiber containing material comprises plant fiber selected from the group consisting of cereal fiber, legume fiber, and any combinations thereof.

3. The process of any of the preceding claims, wherein the plant fiber containing material comprises plant fiber selected from the group consisting of corn fiber, wheat fiber, oat fiber, soy fiber, pea fiber, and any combinations thereof.

4. The process of any of the preceding claims, wherein the relative humidity in the humidifying step is in a range from 50 to 100%.

5. The process of any of the preceding claims, wherein the humidifying temperature is in a range from 55 to 95°C.

6. The process of any of the preceding claims, wherein the plant fiber containing material is humidified for a humidifying period in a range from 10 to 90 minutes, from 15 to 75 minutes, or 30 to 60 minutes.

7. The process of any of the preceding claims, wherein the humidified material is dried at a drying temperature in a range from 50 to 90°C.

8. The process of any of the preceding claims, wherein the humidified material is dried for a drying period in a range from 5 to 25 minutes, from 8 to 20 minutes, or from 10 to 15 minutes.

9. The process of any of the preceding claims, wherein each of the humidifying step and the drying step is performed for one or more than one time, preferably for at least two times, more preferably for two times.

10. A process for reducing volatile compound content of a plant fiber product, comprising the steps of:a. humidifying a plant fiber containing material at a relative humidity from 50 to 100% and a humidifying temperature of less than 100°C to obtain a humidified material; and b. drying the humidified material at a drying temperature from 50 to 90°C to obtain the plant fiber product; wherein the plant fiber product has a reduced volatile compound content as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product.

11. The process of claim 10, wherein the plant fiber containing material comprises plant fiber selected from the group consisting of cereal fiber, legume fiber, and any combinations thereof.

12. The process of any of claims 10 to 11, wherein the plant fiber containing material comprises plant fiber selected from the group consisting of com fiber, wheat fiber, oat fiber, soy fiber, pea fiber, and any combinations thereof.

13. The process of any of claims 10 to 12, wherein the humidifying step is performed at a humidifying temperature in a range from 55 to 95°C.

14. The process of any of claims 10 to 13, wherein each of the humidifying step and the drying step is performed for one or more than one time, preferably for at least two times, more preferably for two times.

15. A plant fiber product prepared by the process of any of the preceding claims.

16. A plant fiber product having content of one or more volatile compounds reduced as compared to an equivalent untreated plant fiber product.

Images