A growing number of consumers opt for plant-based milk substitutes for medical reasons or as a lifestyle choice. Medical reasons include lactose intolerance, with a worldwide prevalence of 75%, and cow's milk allergy. Also, in countries where mammal milk is scarce and expensive, plant milk substitutes serve as a more affordable option. However, many of these products have sensory characteristics objectionable to the mainstream western palate. Technologically, plant milk substitutes are suspensions of dissolved and disintegrated plant material in water, resembling cow's milk in appearance. They are manufactured by extracting the plant material in water, separating the liquid, and formulating the final product. Homogenization and thermal treatments are necessary to improve the suspension and microbial stabilities of commercial products that can be consumed as such or be further processed into fermented dairy-type products. The nutritional properties depend on the plant source, processing, and fortification. As some products have extremely low protein and calcium contents, consumer awareness is important when plant milk substitutes are used to replace cow's milk in the diet, e.g. in the case of dairy intolerances. If formulated into palatable and nutritionally adequate products, plant-based substitutes can offer a sustainable alternative to dairy products.

The market for plant-based dairy-type products is growing as consumers replace bovine milk in their diet, for medical reasons or as a lifestyle choice. A screening of 17 different commercial plant-based milk substitutes based on different cereals, nuts and legumes was performed, including the evaluation of physicochemical and glycaemic properties. Half of the analysed samples had low or no protein contents (<0.5 %). Only samples based on soya showed considerable high protein contents, matching the value of cow’s milk (3.7 %). An in-vitro method was used to predict the glycaemic index. In general, the glycaemic index values ranged from 47 for bovine milk to 64 (almond-based) and up to 100 for rice-based samples. Most of the plant-based milk substitutes were highly unstable with separation rates up to 54.39 %/h. This study demonstrated that nutritional and physicochemical properties of plant-based milk substitutes are strongly dependent on the plant source, processing and fortification. Most products showed low nutritional qualities. Therefore, consumer awareness is important when plant-based milk substitutes are used as an alternative to cow’s milk in the diet.

Exopolysaccharides produced by lactic acid bacteria are a diverse group of polysaccharides produced by many species. They vary widely in their molecular, compositional, and structural characteristics, including mechanisms of synthesis. The physiochemical properties of these polymers mean that they can be exploited for the sensorial and textural enhancement of a variety of food and beverage products. Traditionally, lactic acid bacteria exopolysaccharides have an important role in fermented dairy products and more recently are being applied for the improvement of bakery products. The health benefits that are continually being associated with these polysaccharides enable the development of dual function, added-value, and clean-label products. To fully exploit and understand the functionality of these exopolysaccharides, their isolation, purification, and thorough characterization are of great importance. This review considers each of the above factors and presents the current knowledge on the importance of lactic acid bacteria exopolysaccharides in the food and beverage industry.

Dry fractionated faba bean protein-rich flour (FPR) produced by milling/air classification, and faba bean protein isolate (FPI) produced by acid extraction/isoelectric precipitation were compared in terms of composition, techno-functional properties, nutritional properties and environmental impacts. FPR had a lower protein content (64.1%, dry matter (DM)) compared to FPI (90.1%, DM), due to the inherent limitations of air classification. Of the two ingredients, FPR demonstrated superior functionality, including higher protein solubility (85%), compared to FPI (32%) at pH 7. Foaming capacity was higher for FPR, although foam stability was similar for both ingredients. FPR had greater gelling ability compared to FPI. The higher carbohydrate content of FPR may have contributed to this difference. An amino acid (AA) analysis revealed that both ingredients were low in sulfur-containing AAs, with FPR having a slightly higher level than FPI. The potential nutritional benefits of the aqueous process compared to the dry process used in this study were apparent in the higher in vitro protein digestibility (IVPD) and lower trypsin inhibitor activity (TIA) in FPI compared to FPR. Additionally, vicine/convicine were detected in FPR, but not in FPI. Furthermore, much lower levels of fermentable oligo-, di- and monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAPs) were found in FPI compared to FPR. The life cycle assessment (LCA) revealed a lower environmental impact for FPR, partly due to the extra water and energy required for aqueous processing. However, in a comparison with cow’s milk protein, both FPR and FPI were shown to have considerably lower environmental impacts.