foods Article Preparing a Personalized Meal by Using Soy, Cricket, and Egg Albumin Protein Based on 3D Printing Farnaz Mirazimi 1 , Jordi Saldo 2,3, * , Francesc Sepulcre 1 , Alvar Gràcia 2,4 and Montserrat Pujolà 1 1 Departament d’Enginyeria Agroalimentària i Biotecnologia Castelldefels, Campus del Baix Llobregat, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, 08860 Castelldefels, Spain; farnaz.sadat.mirazimi@upc.edu (F.M.); francesc.sepulcre@upc.edu (F.S.); montserrat.pujola@upc.edu (M.P.) 2 Centre d’Innovació, Recerca i Transferència en Tecnologia dels Aliments (CIRTTA), XaRTA, CERTA-UAB TECNIO, Animal and Food Science Department, Facultat de Veterinària, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Cerdanyola del Vallès, 08193 Barcelona, Spain; alvar.gracia@gmail.com 3 Instituto Politécnico Nacional (IPN), Centro de Desarrollo de Productos Bióticos (CEPROBI), Yautepec 62739, Mexico 4 Natural Machines Iberia, S.L., 08013 Barcelona, Spain * Correspondence: jordi.saldo@uab.cat; Tel.: +34-617-27-51-37 Abstract: Recently, personalized meals and customized food design by means of 3D printing tech- nology have been considered over traditional food manufacturing methods. This study examined the effects of different proteins (soy, cricket, and egg albumin protein) in two concentrations (3% and 5%) on rheological, textural, and 3D printing characteristics. The textural and microstructural properties of different formulations were evaluated and compared. The addition of soy and cricket protein induced an increase in yield stress (τ0 ), storage modulus (G0 ), and loss modulus (G00 ) while egg albumin protein decreased these parameters. The textural analysis (back extrusion and force of extrusion) demonstrated the relationship between increasing the amount of protein in the formula with an improvement in consistency and index of viscosity. These values showed a straight correla- tion with the printability of fortified formulas. 3D printing of the different formulas revealed that soy Citation: Mirazimi, F.; Saldo, J.; and cricket proteins allow the targeting of complex geometry with multilayers. Sepulcre, F.; Gràcia, A.; Pujolà, M. Preparing a Personalized Meal by Keywords: protein; fortified food; nutrition; texture; rheology; 3D food printing Using Soy, Cricket, and Egg Albumin Protein Based on 3D Printing. Foods 2022, 11, 2244. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/foods11152244 1. Introduction Academic Editor: Min Zhang 3D food printing is an example of digitalization in the food sector, which is a popular Received: 21 June 2022 means of developing the capability of the supply and manufacturing chain [1]. 3D food Accepted: 25 July 2022 printing is able to formulate personalized nutrition control and customized food design, and Published: 27 July 2022 is a potential technology to reconfigure a customized food and prototyping tool to facilitate new food product development [2]. Using 3D printing to personalize food nutrition is Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral a field of high importance in research. Food customization is an advantage of 3DFP with regard to jurisdictional claims in (3D Food Printing) technology for providing for an individual’s health-nutritional needs, published maps and institutional affil- including for athletes, pregnant women, older adults, and people with dysphagia. Recently, iations. nutrition control, personalized medicine, and some therapeutic approaches have changed. The technological developments associated with food engineering, food processing, and consumption patterns are evolving. Moreover, 3DFP applications are growing to fulfill Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. individual needs and for personalized nutrition [3]. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. For adults, dietary guidelines suggest an acceptable macronutrient distribution range This article is an open access article of 45–65% from carbohydrates, 20–35% from fat, and 10–35% from protein, with a recom- distributed under the terms and mended dietary allowance of 46 and 56 g/d or 0.8 g/kg body weight of protein [4]. conditions of the Creative Commons Soenen et al. [5] demonstrated that a high-protein diet can help with body-weight Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// loss and weight maintenance. This also resulted in a larger reduction of body weight and creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ fat mass, and thereafter, since they promote a sustained level of satiety, sustained energy 4.0/). expenditure, sparing of fat-free mass, and increased fat oxidation [6,7]. Foods 2022, 11, 2244. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11152244 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/foods Foods 2022, 11, 2244 2 of 12 Soy protein is a very well-known protein rich in essential and non-essential amino acids and has been extensively studied to demonstrate that it can improve physicochemical properties [8]. Soy protein consumption has been associated with many beneficial health effects [9]. Some studies show that soy protein can reduce the circulating levels of total and LDL-cholesterol, modify the taxonomy of the gut microbiota, and improve insulin sensitivity [10,11]. The addition of soy protein increased mechanical strength and the viscosity of food products and can help the self-supporting ability of 3D-printed food [12]. Edible insects can act as an enriching additive when added to food [13]. They are very rich in protein, essential amino acids, vitamins, and minerals, and have recently been attracting the attention of the food industry and researchers for their use in different formulations with different characteristics [14,15]. Nowadays many studies show that crickets (Acheta domesticus) have high nutritional value and consumption is safe and is not associated with side effects. This increasingly improves functionality in food formulations and, as an alternative protein, makes them suitable for many food products [16]. Egg white contains many functionally important proteins, such as ovalbumin, ovo- transferrin, ovomucoid, ovomucin, and lysozyme [17]. Ovalbumin has been used ex- tensively in food technology because of its foaming, emulsification, and binding adhe- sion [18]. In addition, ovalbumin has been found to have antioxidant (protection of linoleic acid and docosahexaenoic acid), antimutagenic and anticarcinogenic immunomodulatory properties [19]. This work focuses on expanding the shape stability, printability, and nutritional profile of formulated purees that can provide new opportunities for leverage of 3D food printing for consumer needs and health. Protein-rich formula is an encouraging food material in the 3D printing sector, although there is still limited accessible information on food proteins for 3D printing. In the present work, protein-rich formulations have been prepared, and different geometries produced by 3D food printing have been studied. The main aims of this study were to (1) investigate the rheological properties and 3D printability of different protein mixtures, (2) evaluate the texture characteristics of new methods, (3) understand the composition of different proteins regarding printability, and (4) persuade people to consume a personalized diet. 2. Materials and Methods 2.1. Materials Potato puree powder (Maggi) was purchased in a local supermarket with the nutri- tional values presented in Table 1. Table 1. Puree potato’s nutritional value per 100 g of product. Energy 1475 KJ/348 Kcal Fat 0.8 g Carbohydrates 75 g Fiber 6.8 g Proteins 7.4 g Salt 0.06 g Moisture 16.7 g Soy Protein acid hydrolysate (SPAH) was procured from Sigma-Aldrich (Nitrogen analysis ≥ 12% total = 75% protein, calculated applying a factor of 6.25 g protein/g N). Cricket protein powder 70% protein (Acheta domesticus) was obtained from Origen farms, Albacete, Spain. Egg albumin 75% protein was obtained from Avantor® . According to the regulation (EC) N.1924/2006, all the formulations were high in protein [20] (Table 2). Foods 2022, 11, 2244 3 of 12 Table 2. Protein information. Protein Soy Protein (S) Cricket Protein (C) Egg Albumin (A) Protein % in recipe 3 5 3 5 3 5 Protein/100 g product 2.9 4.6 2.7 4.4 2.9 4.6 Energy Kcal/100 g product 59.3 67.6 61.3 71.5 58.9 66.8 2.2. Sample Preparation The same base was applied for all the formulations: the different proteins (soy (SPAH), cricket, and egg albumin) were dissolved or dispersed in 100 mL of distilled water at 2 different levels (3 and 5%) with the addition of 17 g potato powder. The formulations were prepared by mixing 100 mL of distilled water and protein (albumin or cricket) and keeping the mixture in an oven at 40 ◦ C for 30 min to denature the protein. For soy protein (SPAH), the conditions to denature the protein were 90 ◦ C for 30 min. All the samples were kept in an oven with a lid to avoid evaporation. Finally, the dehydrated potato powder was added. Formulations were coded with a letter indicating the protein source (S, C, or A for soy, cricket, or egg albumin, respectively) and a number expressing the amount of protein added (3 or 5%). CS is the code for the control sample, which shares the same formulation but with no protein added, and the preparation condition was in an oven at 40 ◦ C for 30 min. Samples were kept overnight (22–24 h) in a fridge set at 2 ◦ C and all samples were placed in an incubator at 20 ◦ C for two hours before starting the rheological measurements. The whole experiment was repeated 3 times. 2.3. Rheological Measurements 2.3.1. Frequency Sweep Test The rheological measurements were performed with a rheometer (Rheostress RS1, version 127, Barcelona, Spain) and computer software (HAAKE RheoWin 3 Job and Data Manager Software, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). Samples were analyzed using a plate-plate geometry with a 1-mm gap between the 35-mm serrated plate (PP60 sensor) and the serrated base for their flow properties. The upper plate was placed into the measuring position, and the surplus sample was trimmed. Measuring rheological properties started after leaving samples to rest for 2 min. Two types of rheological tests were run: a rotational test and a dynamic oscillatory test. The temperature of the rheological tests was unvarying at 20.0 ± 0.1 ◦ C for both measurements. The linear viscoelastic region was identified by a strain sweep test at a shear rate of 0.0025 s−1 before attempting the dynamic rheological measurement [21]. Oscillatory tests were performed to determine the strength and stability of the different formulations and explain the behavior of material from 0.1 to 10 Hz to understand how viscous or elastic properties dominated the behavior of the prepared formulations. Rheological properties can be evaluated through the storage modulus (G0 ), loss modulus (G00 ), and loss tangent (tan δ) which describes the ratio of the loss modulus to storage modulus (G00 /G0 ). Samples were measured before the 3D printing test. 2.3.2. Rotational Rheological Measurements, Viscosity, and Yield Stress Shear rate was raised during the first 30 s logarithmically from 0.1 to 10 s−1 , after being preserved at 10 s−1 for 30 s, and finally was cut down logarithmically again to 0.1 s−1 over 30 s. For each sample, the shear stress (τ), viscosity (η), and yield stress were calculated following standard procedures [22]. 2.4. Texture Properties Characterization 2.4.1. TPA 3D printed hexagon shape made of 8 layers using a Foodini® 3D Food Printer machine (Natural Machines Iberia, S.L., Barcelona, Spain) was analyzed by TPA test to determine 3D printed hexagon shape made of 8 layers using a Foodini® 3D Food Printer m chine (Natural Machines Iberia, S.L., Barcelona, Spain) was analyzed by TPA test to termine the textural properties of the printed formulations. Texture profile analyses printed samples were performed at 20 °C using a Texture Analyser (TA. XT Plus, Sta Foods 2022, 11, 2244 4 of 12 Micro Systems, Godalming GU7 1YL, UK) with a compression plate (P/100). Double-cy compression tests were performed at a test speed of 2 mm/s, a post-test speed of 2 mm and compression strain was set at 35%, and a with a time between compressions of the textural properties of the printed formulations. Texture profile analyses of printed Each formulation samples was measured were performed three at 20 ◦ C using times per a Texture sample. Analyser (TA.Hardness, chewiness, XT Plus, Stable Micro cohesi ness, adhesiveness, Systems, Godalming chewiness, GU7 1YL, UK) andwith resilience were recorded a compression in oneDouble-cycle plate (P/100). replicate per samp compression tests were performed at a test speed of 2 mm/s, a post-test speed of 2 mm/s, and compression 2.4.2. strain was setTest Backward-Extrusion at 35%, and a with a time between compressions of 5 s. Each formulation was measured three times per sample. Hardness, chewiness, cohesiveness, The TA. XT adhesiveness, Plus, Stable chewiness, Micro Systems, and resilience UK, was were recorded used in one to perform replicate a compression an per sample. ysis with a 3.5 cm diameter plate probe. The purees were placed in a cylindrical contai 52.4.2. cm in Backward-Extrusion diameter and 6.5Test cm high and filled to 75% of the volume of the container. The comparison, For TA. XT Plus, Stable Micro Systems, the method UK, was was adjusted to used mimicto the perform speeda compression of the printing con analysis with a 3.5 cm diameter plate probe. The purees were tions of the Foodini (speed of 2 mm/s for a distance of 30 mm). ® placed in a cylindrical container 5 cm in diameter and 6.5 cm high and filled to 75% of the volume of the container. For comparison, the method was adjusted to mimic the speed of the printing conditions 2.4.3. Force of Extrusion of the Foodini® (speed of 2 mm/s for a distance of 30 mm). To determine the firmness (N) and consistency (N·s) of the extrusion process w 2.4.3. the Force of Foodini ®, Extrusion the 304 stainless steel capsules of the printer (© 2021 Natural Machin To determine with a capacity the100 of firmness mL and(N) and 4 mm consistency mouthpiece(N·s) of the extrusion have been used process withwith the XT (Sta a TA. Foodini® , the 304 stainless steel capsules of the printer (© 2021 Natural Machines), with Micro Systems, UK) was equipped with a 2.5 cm diameter cylindrical probe. The pr a capacity of 100 mL and 4 mm mouthpiece have been used with a TA. XT (Stable Micro applied Systems,force UK) wasto the plunger equipped withofa 2.5 thecmcapsule diameter(38cylindrical mm in diameter), pushing probe. The probe the puree applied through theplunger force to the mouthofplaced at the the capsule (38bottom of the capsule. mm in diameter), pushingThe maximum the puree force needed out through extrude the mouth theplaced product at thewas obtained bottom of the by the analysis capsule. of the force The maximum results of a to needed test performed a extrude the product was obtained by the analysis of the speed of 2 mm/s and for a distance of 30 mm (Figure 1). results of a test performed at a speed of 2 mm/s and for a distance of 30 mm (Figure 1). Figure 1. Force of extrusion method. Figure 1. Force of extrusion method. 2.5. Conditions of 3D Food Printing For printing, Foodini® an extrusion-based commercial system, was used. The for- 2.5. Conditions of 3D Food ,Printing mulations were produced using a nozzle size of 1.5 mm and a hexagon prism of 8 layers was For printing, Foodini ®, an extrusion-based commercial system, was used. The form created for printing and analyzing the samples. Before printing the samples all the lations were were formulations produced passedusing througha nozzle size a sieve as of 1.5 to a means mm and a or eliminate hexagon prism reduce the of 8 layers w presence of lumps created forthat may disturb printing printing, with and analyzing the asamples. nozzle ofBefore a smallprinting diameterthe (1.5samples mm). Other all the form lations were passed through a sieve as a means to eliminate or reduce thetopresence more complex structures were printed, and if the printed sample’s structures were able keep their shape for at least 15 min, they were considered printable. The first ingredient lumps that may disturb printing, with a nozzle of a small diameter (1.5 mm). Other m holds at 4.2 mm, with the first layer nozzle height at 1.4 mm, and the print speed was set at complex structures were printed, and if the printed sample’s structures were able to k 3500 mm/min. their shape for at least 15 min, they were considered printable. The first ingredient ho Foods 2022, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 13 Foods 2022, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 13 at 4.2 mm, with the first layer nozzle height at 1.4 mm, and the print speed was set at 3500 at mm/min. 4.2 mm, with the first layer nozzle height at 1.4 mm, and the print speed was set at 3500 Foods 2022, 11, 2244 5 of 12 mm/min. 2.6. Statistical Analysis 2.6. Statistical Analysis Statistical analyses of the data were determined on Minitab 18 (Minitab link., Coven- 2.6. Statistical Analysis try,Statistical UK), using analyses of the analysis data wereGeneral of variance, determined Linear onModel, Minitab 18 Tukey’s and (Minitabcomparison link., Coven- test Statistical try,rheology, UK), using analysesof andanalysis textural ofvariance, the data were determined General characteristics were Linear onsignificant Minitab Model, tested for 18differences (Minitab and Tukey’s link., (p 0.98), Bingham models) was selected models) were as tested. were the best tested. Bingham, model towith Bingham, fit with aahigh the high coefficient flow characteristics coefficient ofdetermination of determination of the samples. (R(R>The> 0.98), Bingham 0.98), was was selected model selected as asisthe the model explained best bestby model tothefitflow theτflow Statistical analysesThe of the data were determined on Minitab bythe 18 (M thefit to equation τ₀ +characteristics =characteristics ηᵨ ɣ̇, whereofτ the of the (Pa) is thesamples. samples. shear Thestress, Bingham Bingham ismodel τ₀ (Pa)model is is the yield explained stress, ηᵨby explained (Pa·s) theequation try, UK), using analysis of variance, General Linear Model, and Tukey isequation τ τ= =τ0τ₀and the viscosity ++ηηᵨ ,where $ ɣ̇ɣ,̇ (swhere − 1) isττthe (Pa) (Pa) isisthe shear the shearstress, rate. shear stress,ττ₀ (Pa)isisthe 0 (Pa) theyield yieldstress, stress,ηηᵨ (Pa·s) ρ (Pa ·s) is is the viscosity The addition and ɣ̇ of (s −− 1)1)isisrheology, SPAH the and the shear cricket shear and textural characteristics were tested for significant differe rate. rate.protein showed a positive correlation with the The yield The addition stress. These addition ofproteins SPAH of SPAH and could and cricket increase cricket protein showed the mechanical protein showed a strength positive a positive correlation in with line with other correlation with the stud- the 3. Results yield ies stress. yield stress. [12,24]. These The Theseproteins yield proteins stress couldshows increase could the the mechanical increase mechanical the mechanical strength strength in line in strength of formulations. withlineother with Yield stud- other stress is iesstudies [12,24]. the ability [12,24]. The yield of the The yield stress formulations shows3.1.toRheological stress shows the keep the mechanical their Properties mechanical shape strength strength of under gravity ofpoint formulations. and formulations. Yield to the stress Yield is feasibility thestress ofability is of thethe extrusion. ability They of formulations also thesupported formulations to keep 3.1.1. their toshape successive Viscosity keep their Yieldshape under andstacked gravity layers Stress under aftergravity and point toand deposition. point to the the feasibility The larger of feasibility extrusion. the ofThey yield stress, extrusion. alsobetter the They supportedthe also supported successive self-supporting, For successive stacked the formulation and the to stacked layers easier have layers after the good after extrusion deposition. smooth printability,deposition. The thelarger The prop- rheological prop thelarger erties the yield[1,25]. yield stress, the The stress, betterthe formulation thebetter S5 the and self-supporting, self-supporting, C5 and presented the and easier the the the highest easier smooth yieldthe based products are critical [23]. For selecting the best performer smooth extrusion stress (535 extrusion prop- Pa) and diffe properties erties [1,25].(451 viscosity [1,25]. The Pa) The formulation among formulation the modelsand S5 S5tested C5 and formulations (e.g., C5 presented presented Power the highest (Table Law, the 3) highest and yield the lower Herschel-Bulkley, yield stress stress (535 yield Casson, Pa)(535 stress andand Pa) and Bingham m and viscosity viscosity viscosity (451 Pa) belongs (451 Pa)the among to among thesamples the formulations tested Bingham, tested withwith formulations egg (Table aalbumin high (Table 3) and 3) protein coefficient ofand the that lowerthe yield could lower yield not stress determination stress (R and self-support > 0.98), was s and viscosity viscosity multilayer belongs belongs shapes, so to to the thethe samples that samples with product with egg egg albumin albumin collapsed protein protein thatthat couldcould notnot self-support self-support model to fit the flow after printing. characteristics of the samples. The Bingham mo multilayer shapes, multilayer shapes, so that the the so that the product product collapsed collapsed after after printing. printing. equation τ = τ₀ + ηᵨ ɣ̇, where τ (Pa) is the shear stress, τ₀ (Pa) is the y Table 3. The Bingham model η =ηᵨ + τ₀/ɣ̇ parameters for the different proteins at different concen- Table 3. The Bingham model is theηviscosity = η$ + and τ0 ;/ ɣ̇ (sparameters − 1) is the shear for therate. different proteins at trations. Table 3. The Bingham model η =ηᵨ + τ₀/ɣ̇ parameters for the different proteins at different concen- different concentrations. The addition of SPAH and cricket protein showed a positive co trations. Samples Yield Point (Pa)yield stress. These ηᵨproteins (Pa·s) could increase theτ₀ mechanical (Pa) strength in li Samples Yield ies Point (Pa) [12,24]. The yield η$ (Pa stress ·s) the mechanical shows (Pa) τ0 strength of formulat Samples CS Yield Point 620 (Pa) bc ηᵨ (Pa·s) 105 bc τ₀ (Pa) 302 b bc bc the 620 bc bc b CSS3 CS 620636 ability of the105 formulations bc b 254 105 to keep their shape 302 469 under b302 ab gravity and po S3 636 bc 254 b 469 ab S3S5 636981bc a of extrusion. They also 254451b a supported successive stacked 469535 a ab a layers after dep S5 981 a 451 a 535the easier the smoo S5C3 C3 981 a 742 bc the yield stress, the 451 better a 302 ab 302 ab the self-supporting, 535 and 486 a ab 742 bc 486 ab C3C5 C5 742917bc b erties [1,25]. The302 formulation ab ab S5 and C5 presented 486 ab a athe highest yield 917 b 397 397 ab 503 503 viscosity (451 Pa) among the ctested formulations (Table 3) and the low C5A3 A3 917530 b c 530 c 397 ab c 87 87 503290a290c c viscosity 558 c belongs87to92 c the samples 92 c with egg albumin c protein that cou A3A5 A5 530558c c c 290270c270c Note: multilayer shapes, so that the product collapsed after printing. A5CS Note: CS(Control Sample), (Control 558S3 c (3% Soy), S5 (5% Soy), C3 92 Sample), S3 (3% Soy), S5 (5%(3% c Cricket), C5 (5% Cricket), A3 270 Soy), C3 (3% Cricket), C5 (5% (3%Cricket), Albumin), c and(3% A3 A5 (5% Albumin). Different superscript letters in the same column indicate a significant difference (p < 0.05). Albumin), Note: and A5 CS (Control (5% Albumin). Sample), S3 (3% Different superscript Soy), S5 (5% Soy), C3letters in the same (3% Cricket), C5 column indicate (5% Cricket), A3a (3% signif- Table 3. The Bingham model η =ηᵨ + τ₀/ɣ̇ parameters for the different protein icant difference (p < 0.05). Albumin), and A5 (5% Albumin). Different superscript letters in the same column indicate a signif- Table 3 (p shows that SPAH trations. and cricket had a significant (p < 0.05) effect on raising the icant difference < 0.05). viscosity. TableIncreasing 3 shows thatthe SPAH concentration of SPAH and cricket Samples had ahad Yield a significant (Pa) (p < effect significant Point onηᵨraising 0.05) effect viscosity on raising (Pa·s) the but increasing Table 3Increasing viscosity. the amount shows thatthe SPAH of cricket andCS and cricketofhad concentration egg SPAH albumin a significant had from 3% (p < 0.05) a significant to 5% effect effect did not on raising on 105 raising change the bc viscosity 620 bc the but viscosity. viscosity. Increasing increasing the the concentration amount of cricket of SPAH and egg had a significant albumin from 3% effect to on 5% raising did not viscosity change the S3 636 bc 254 b The highthe butviscosity. increasing yield point of amount and viscosity cricket and produced egg albuminthrough from the 3%bonds to 5% between did not protein-starch change the S5 981 a 451 a and protein–protein viscosity. The high yield point internal andmicrostructure, viscosity contribute produced through to the the elasticity of the network bonds between protein- of the potato starch puree and C3 consequently 742 bc generate a starch internal 302 ab microstructure The and starch highprotein–protein yield point andinternal viscosity produced through microstructure, contributethe bonds to the between elasticity protein- of the net- that is more insistent to C5 deformation. The 917 b formulations C5 (917 Pa), C3 397 abPa), and S3 (742 starch workand protein–protein of the potato starchinternal puree and microstructure, consequentlycontribute generate atostarch the elasticity internalof the net- microstruc- (636 A3 530Pa), c 87 crespectively tureofPa) work the that showed morehigh ispotato starchyield insistent stress puree to andand viscosity The (397 consequently deformation. generate formulations(302a Pa), starch C5 andinternal (917 (254 Pa), Pa), C3 microstruc- (742 Pa), and compared toshowed the control sample, A5 which had good 558 c results for a (917 multilayer 92 c ture S3that (636isPa)more insistent highto deformation. yield stress and The formulations viscosity (397 Pa), C5 (302 Pa), Pa), andC3shape. (742Pa), (254 Pa),respec- and Note: CS (Control Sample), S3 (3% Soy), S5 (5% Soy), C3 (3% Cricket), C5 ( S3tively (636 Pa) showedto compared high theyield stress control and viscosity sample, which had (397 Pa),results good (302 Pa), forand (254 Pa), shape. a multilayer respec- 3.1.2. Viscoelastic Behavior Albumin), and A5 (5% Albumin). Different superscript letters in the same colu tively compared to the controlicantsample, which difference had good results for a multilayer shape. (p < 0.05).sweep test was used. Storage modulus To investigate the elastic modulus, a frequency 0 00 (G ) and loss modulus (G ) of formulations were frequency-dependent revealing a gel-like structure with G0 higher than GTable 3 shows 00 (Table that SPAH 4). Storage and cricket modulus had a significant (G0 ) indicates (p < 0.05) e the elastic viscosity. Increasing the concentration of SPAH had a significant effect but increasing the amount of cricket and egg albumin from 3% to 5% viscosity. The high yield point and viscosity produced through the bond starch and protein–protein internal microstructure, contribute to the e Foods 2022, 11, 2244 6 of 12 solid-like behavior and the mechanical strength. These values provide information about the mechanical properties that can be connected to the self-supporting capacity of 3D printing [26]. G0 of formulations with SPAH and cricket protein were higher, indicating that they can possess a better load-bearing capacity without deformation. Table 4. Storage modulus (G0 ), loss modulus (G00 ), and tan δ at 10 Hz for different proteins at different concentrations. Samples G0 (Pa) G00 (Pa) TANGENT δ (−) CS 686 b 106 bc 0.16 ab S3 717 b 121 b 0.16 ab S5 995 a 163 a 0.13 b C3 816 ab 130 ab 0.15 b C5 827 ab 131 ab 0.15 b A3 661 bc 96 c 0.19 a A5 404 c 88 c 0.19 a Note: CS (Control Sample), S3 (3% Soy), S5 (5% Soy), C3 (3% Cricket), C5 (5% Cricket), A3 (3% Albumin), and A5 (5% Albumin). Different superscript letters in the same column indicate a significant difference (p < 0.05). Food formulations with strong mechanical strength compared to control samples (S5 (995 Pa), C5 (827 Pa), C3 (816 Pa), and S5 (717 Pa)) determine excellent self-supporting performance after deposition and could withstand the complex printed shape. A high tan δ means more viscous behavior, a low tan δ means more elastic behavior and a tan δ smaller than 1 signifies predominantly elastic behavior. All the formulations were significantly lower than 1 and show viscoelastic behavior. 3.2. Texture 3.2.1. TPA TPA is an important test for textural characterization and is explained by simulating human mastication behavior. It is accomplished as a two-bite compression test as it provides a link between mechanical properties and textural attributes during oral processing [27]. Table 5 shows results of the texture profile analysis (TPA) that was carried out for the printed food samples. Table 5. Textural properties of 3D printed samples for different proteins at different concentrations. Hardness Adhesiveness Cohesiveness Springiness Gumminess Chewiness Resilience Samples (N) (N·s) (−) (−) (N) (−) (−) CS 2.68 a −4.16 b 0.005 a 0.009 a 2.21 a 2.08 a 0.0007 a S3 3.36 a −5.55 a 0.006 a 0.009 a 2.30 a 2.11 a 0.0007 a S5 3.34 a −5.70 a 0.006 a 0.009 a 2.39 a 2.21 a 0.0006 a C3 3.61 a −5.75 a 0.006 a 0.009 a 2.52 a 2.35 a 0.0006 a C5 3.58 a −6.19 a 0.006 a 0.009 a 2.55 a 2.36 a 0.0006 a A3 2.72 a −3.80 c 0.005 a 0.008 a 2.12 a 2.01 a 0.0007 a A5 2.79 a −3.73 c 0.005 a 0.009 a 2.32 a 2.04 a 0.0007 a Note: CS (Control Sample), S3 (3% Soy), S5 (5% Soy), C3 (3% Cricket), C5 (5% Cricket), A3 (3% Albumin), and A5 (5% Albumin). Different superscript letters in the same column indicate a significant difference (p < 0.05). The hardness, cohesiveness, springiness, gumminess, chewiness, and resilience of dif- ferent proteins had no significant (p < 0.05) differences, even when increasing the amount of protein concentration. The only parameter that changed in this test was adhesiveness where the lowest measurement belongs to the A5 (−3.80 N·s) and A3 (−3.73 N·s), respectively, and the highest measurements were for C5 (−5.75 N·s), S5 (−5.70 N·s) and S3 (−5.55 N·s). The other formulations (C3, and CS) showed the same behavior and had no significant differences (p < 0.05). The formulations prepared with egg albumin had a relatively low yield point and storage modulus which, considering high adhesiveness, can be translated into the lower energy needed to make a swallowable bolus and weak gel structure [28]. Foods 2022, 11, 2244 7 of 12 3.2.2. Back Extrusion Back extrusion is a technique that is used to determine the flow properties of New- tonian and non-Newtonian fluids in the industrial environment for several purposes, including quality control. Some studies show some correlation between the back-extrusion technique and rheological tests [29]. Comparing the measurement of force applied by the annular space with the rheological properties of the samples, it can be observed that the force reflected the rheological properties of the samples. The consistency of samples with SPAH 5% and cricket 5% was higher than the rest of the formulations due to higher resistance to flow and therefore higher shear viscosity. The index of viscosity is the extrusion energy or work of adhesion when it becomes higher; more resistance is required when pulling out the sample and it has been demon- strated that the index of viscosity is related to the consistency of the purees [30]. The formulations with SPAH had the highest index of viscosity followed by the samples with cricket protein, which had a higher index of viscosity than the control sample. The formu- lations with albumin showed a low index of viscosity due to the less viscosity and yield stress referring to the rheological test (Table 3). Cohesiveness means ‘work of cohesion’, and the more negative the value, the more ‘cohesive’ is the sample. The highest cohesiveness among the tested formulations is for sample C5 and significantly (p < 0.05) changed when increasing cricket protein from 3% to 5%. Samples with SPAH (S5 and S3) showed a different behaviour and did not change Foods 2022, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 13 when increasing the amount of protein from 3% to 5% (Figure 2). The albumin had weak consistency and cohesiveness, which means less resistance to flow. TEXTURE ANALYSIS - BACK EXTRUTION 0.500 0.000 0.000 -0.010 -0.500 -1.000 -0.020 -1.500 -2.000 -0.030 -2.500 -0.040 -3.000 -3.500 -0.050 -4.000 -4.500 -0.060 CS S3 S5 C3 C5 A3 A5 ab ab a bc a bc c Consistency (N·s) 0.047 0.047 0.069 0.039 0.058 0.037 0.032 ab b b ab c a a Cohesiveness (N) -3.230 -3.980 -3.360 -2.820 -4.050 -2.280 -1.950 bc d e cd d ab a Index of Viscosity (N·s) -0.023 -0.032 -0.050 -0.028 -0.033 -0.017 -0.014 FigureFigure 2. Back2.extrusion Back extrusion measurements measurements forproteins for different different at proteins at different concentra- different concentrations. Note: CS tions. Note: CS (Control Sample), S3 (3% Soy), S5 (5% Soy), C3 (3% Cricket), (Control Sample), S3 (3% Soy), S5 (5% Soy), C3 (3% Cricket), C5 (5% Cricket), A3 (3% Albumin),C5 (5% Cricket), A3 (3% Albumin), and A5 (5% Albumin). Different superscript letters in the same and A5 (5% Albumin). Different superscript letters in the same row indicate a significant difference row indicate (p < 0.05). a significant difference (p < 0.05). 3.2.3. Force of 3.2.3. Force of Extrusion Extrusion According According toto the the force force of of extrusion extrusion method method (Figure (Figure 3), 3), the the formulation S5 had formulation S5 had the the highest consistency and firmness (p < 0.05). When increasing the amount of SPAH from highest consistency and firmness (p < 0.05). When increasing the amount of SPAH from 3 to3 to 5%, these values increased (p < 0.05). The formulations with cricket protein (C3 and C5) also increased the consistency (0.37 and 0.43 N·s) and firmness (0.028 and 0.035 N), respec- tively, compared to the control sample (CS). However, the samples with SPAH and cricket all showed good printability for multilayer shapes. This good performance can be ex- Foods 2022, 11, 2244 8 of 12 5%, these values increased (p < 0.05). The formulations with cricket protein (C3 and C5) also increased the consistency (0.37 and 0.43 N·s) and firmness (0.028 and 0.035 N), respectively, compared to the control sample (CS). However, the samples with SPAH and cricket all showed good printability for multilayer shapes. This good performance can be explained by the strong connections between starch granules and protein, with ability to build a 3D network in the case of using soy and cricket protein. Huang et al. [31] showed that the mixtures of the protein and polysaccharides were able to increase the texture parameters that may be described similarly in the case of the mixture of proteins and starch in this work. Foods 2022, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW The formulations with albumin A3 and A5 had poor consistency and firmness pointing9 to of 13 a difficulty in building a strong enough network with the potato starch, as opposed to the case of soy or cricket. 0.60 0.05 a a 0.50 0.04 ab ab ab Consistency (N·s) 0.40 b b Firmness (N) c bc 0.03 b b 0.30 d bc c 0.02 0.20 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.00 CS S3 S5 C3 C5 A3 A5 CS S3 S5 C3 C5 A3 A5 Formulations Formulations (a) (b) Figure Figure3.3.Force of of Force extrusion measurements extrusion measurements forfor different proteins different proteinsat at different concentrations. different concentrations. a) Con- a) sistency Consistency b) Firmness Note: CS (Control Sample), S3 (3% Soy), S5 (5% Soy), C3 (3% Cricket),(5% b) Firmness Note: CS (Control Sample), S3 (3% Soy), S5 (5% Soy), C3 (3% Cricket), C5 Cricket), A3 (3% Albumin), C5 (5% Cricket), and A5 (5% A3 (3% Albumin), andAlbumin). DifferentDifferent A5 (5% Albumin). superscript letters indicate superscript a significant letters indicate a difference (p < 0.05). significant difference (p < 0.05). 3.3.3D 3.3. 3DPrinting PrintingTest Test and and Correlations Correlations As observed in the printing As observed in the printing experiments, experiments, all the allformulations could be the formulations easily could beextruded easily ex- from the nozzle at 25 ◦ C. To compare the printability and stability of the formulations truded from the nozzle at 25 °C. To compare the printability and stability of the formula- withwith tions different proteins, different different proteins, designs different were applied. designs FigureFigure were applied. 4 shows the result 4 shows of 3D of the result printing. The formulations with SPAH and cricket protein were able to support the extruded 3D printing. The formulations with SPAH and cricket protein were able to support the materials and stable self-supporting structures for all the shapes that have been designed, extruded materials and stable self-supporting structures for all the shapes that have been even for the complex examples with 13- and 11-layer flower shapes. The hexagonal shape designed, even for the complex examples with 13- and 11-layer flower shapes. The hexag- for all food formulations as well as the control sample was able to maintain the structure onal shapethan for more for all 15food min, formulations as well as the except for formulations with control samplethat egg albumin wasshowed able to maintain very poorthe structure for more than 15 min, except for formulations with egg albumin resolution due to the low rheological and textural properties. The control formula, as well that showed as very thosepoor resolution including SPAHdue to the low or cricket, wererheological able to formand textural stable properties. self-supporting The control structures whenfor- mula, as well printing as those complex including flower SPAH or mountain or cricket, shapes (Figurewere 4G–J)able of 9toprinted form stable layers. self-supporting Conversely, structures when printing the formulations complex fortified with flower albumin were ornot mountain shapes the able to tolerate (Figure load of4G–J) the 9oflayers 9 printed of layers. materialConversely, and the 3D the formulations printed flower andfortified mountainwith albumin shapes were collapsed not their under able own to tolerate weight.the load ofRecently, many the 9 layers ofstudies material have andshown the 3Dthat printed printed shape flower stability and is closely mountain shapesrelated to collapsed rheological properties, 0 under their own weight.especially the G and τ0 of materials. The materials with higher G0 and τ0 showed better shape retention. The τ0 shows the minimum force necessary for material extrusion and G0 reflects the mechanical strength of mixtures. For developing Foods 2022, 11, 2244 9 of 12 structures through 3D printing, G0 and τ0 are critical for supporting sequentially deposited layers and stability of printed shape. Liu et al. [32] determined τ0 of 312.16 (Pa), which had good extrudability and shape retention for the extrusion-based printer. In the present study, the samples with the best 3D shapes were produced from formulas fortified with SPAH and cricket protein, having high values for τ0 (486 Pa–535 Pa) and G0 (717 Pa–995 Pa). The mixtures with either SPAH or cricket protein had higher τ0 and G0 and were strong enough to support the deposited layers and hold the printed structures. The samples with different concentrations of egg albumin had low τ0 (A3 290 Pa and A5 270 Pa) and G0 (A3 96 Pa and A5 88 Pa), lower even than the control sample, and did not possess enough mechanical Foods 2022, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW strength to uphold complex shapes with many layers, resulting in the deformation 10 of of 13 the printed shape and the poor resolution supporting structure observed in formulations including egg albumin (Figure 4). Figure Figure4.4.Pictures Pictures of 3D printing of 3D printingformulations formulations with with different different proteins. proteins. Note:Note: CS (Control CS (Control Sample), Sample), S3 S3(3% (3%Soy), Soy), S5 (5% Soy), C3 (3% Cricket), C5 (5% Cricket), A3 (3% Albumin), and A5 (5% S5 (5% Soy), C3 (3% Cricket), C5 (5% Cricket), A3 (3% Albumin), and A5 (5% Albumin).Albumin). (A) 8 layers hexagon shape top (B) 8 layers hexagon shape side (C) 13 layers flower shape top (D) (A) 8 layers hexagon shape top (B) 8 layers hexagon shape side (C) 13 layers flower shape top 13 layers flower shape side (E) 11 layers flower shape top (F) 11 layers flower shape side (G) 9 layers (D) 13 layers flower shape side (E) 11 layers flower shape top (F) 11 layers flower shape side flower shape top (H) 9 layers flower shape side (I) 28 layers mountain shape top (J) 28 layers moun- (G) 9 layers flower shape top (H) 9 layers flower shape side (I) 28 layers mountain shape top tain shape side. (J) 28 layers mountain shape side. Recently, many studies have shown that printed shape stability is closely related to 4. Discussion rheological The 3Dproperties, especially printing process can bethe G′ and τ₀ separated of three into materials. stages:The materials with 1—extrusion, higher G′ 2—recovery, and τ₀ showed better shape retention. The τ₀ shows the minimum force and 3—self-support. These stages are directly connected with the rheological properties, necessary for ma- terial extrusion and G′ reflects the mechanical strength 0 of mixtures. For 00 developing including viscosity, yield stress and elastic modulus (G ), and viscous modulus (G ) [33]. struc- tures through Extrusion 3D printing, correlates G′ and with yield τ₀ are stress critical and for supporting it is worth noting that,sequentially although deposited the smallerlay- ers theand yieldstability stress, of theprinted shape. easier for the Liu et al.to material [32] be determined extruded, it τ₀ of implied also 312.16 (Pa), that which the me- had chanical good strength ofand extrudability the material may be unfavorable shape retention for the subsequent for the extrusion-based self-support printer. and In the present deformation study, resistance the samples withofthe thebest material extrusion 3D shapes were[34]. produced from formulas fortified with Adding SPAH and cricket protein SPAH and cricket protein, having high values forimproved theτ₀rheological (486 Pa–535 characteristics, Pa) and G′ (717showed Pa–995 stronger Pa). mechanicalwith The mixtures properties, and furthered either SPAH printability. or cricket protein SPAH and cricket had higher proteins τ₀ and G′ and were were found to be ideal ingredients for 3D food printing. strong enough to support the deposited layers and hold the printed structures. The sam- Proteins and polysaccharides interact with each other and can change the structure ples with different concentrations of egg albumin had low τ₀ (A3 290 Pa and A5 270 Pa) and properties of food formulations. These interactions are attracting a lot of attention in and G’ (A3 96 Pa and A5 88 Pa), lower even than the control sample, and did not possess the food industry because food structure and stability are dependent on them [35]. enough mechanical strength to uphold complex shapes with many layers, resulting in the deformation of the printed shape and the poor resolution supporting structure observed in formulations including egg albumin (Figure 4). 4. Discussion Foods 2022, 11, 2244 10 of 12 Conventionally, when complexes of protein-polysaccharide are formed, their func- tional properties are potentially better than those of the proteins and polysaccharides alone. However, characteristics depend on several parameters such as protein and polysaccharide type and concentrations, pH, temperature, and the concentration of cations present in the solution, which can form complexes or thermodynamic incompatibilities [36,37]. Mixing two biopolymers in a solution, such as a polysaccharide and a protein, can build interactions that may present two possibilities: the interaction of the two biopolymers can be segregative (the biopolymers repel each other and are denoted as incompatible) or associative (the biopolymers attract one another) [38]. Hence, in this work, with the addition of SPAH and cricket protein, the behavior of the polysaccharide-protein mixture was associative and could create a complexation mixture. In opposition, egg albumin protein behavior with polysaccharides in the condition of this work created a segregative mixture that causes incompatibility. Conditions for incompatibility are dependent on the structure and composition of the biopolymer pair [39]. The samples with egg albumin showed low values for the rheological parameters compared to the control sample due to the segregation in the polysaccharide-protein mix- ture produced by their incompatibility. Grinberg and Tolstoguzov [40] demonstrated that incompatibility is strongly dependent upon the conformational state of the proteins and is enhanced by protein denaturation. Egg albumin has a very low transition temperature and can be more susceptible to suffering incompatibility effects associated with its denaturation. 5. Conclusions It is a new challenge to create a nutritional formulation that is customized, extrudable, and consistent for complex shapes. In conclusion, the printability and print stability of pureed food can be improved by adding protein. This study demonstrated the applicability of food ingredients (e.g., soy protein, cricket protein, and egg albumin protein) in 3D food printing, which is a starting point for the future development of healthy, nutritional, and customized foods. The addition of soy and cricket protein (in the doses tested) significantly increased all the rheological values (yield stress, viscosity, G0 , and G00 ). The consistency and firmness according to the extrusion force test were increased significantly in the case of using soy and cricket protein, which provided an accurate printing result and a stable geometry for multilayer complex shapes. Additionally, the rheological values and the consistency obtained from the extrusion force test increased with the amount of soy protein. Best printing results were achieved by using soy and cricket proteins which showed good fluidity with higher G0 , G00 , and τ0 . On the other hand, the addition of egg albumin could not support the designed structure during the 3D printing process and showed weaker rheological and textural properties because of protein incompatibility due to protein denaturation in the conditions of this study. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, F.M., M.P., F.S. and J.S.; methodology, J.S.; resources, J.S., M.P. and A.G.; writing—original draft preparation, F.M.; writing—review and editing, J.S., M.P., F.S. and A.G.; supervision, M.P. and J.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research received no external funding. Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable. Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable. Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available within the article. Acknowledgments: For allowing the use of the 3D-printer Foodini, we want to acknowledge the support provided by Natural Machines Iberia, S.L. company, Spain-Barcelona. Conflicts of Interest: J.S. is affiliated to the two academic institutions: to UAB as main affiliation, but also to IPN-CEPROBI as visiting scholar. A.G. worked for Natural Machines and organized the use of Fodinni 3D printer for application tests. Foods 2022, 11, 2244 11 of 12 References 1. Lille, M.; Nurmela, A.; Nordlund, E.; Metsä-Kortelainen, S.; Sozer, N. Applicability of protein and fiber-rich food materials in extrusion-based 3D printing. J. Food Eng. 2018, 220, 20–27. [CrossRef] 2. Sun, J.; Zhou, W.; Huang, D.; Fuh, J.Y.H.; Hong, G.S. An Overview of 3D Printing Technologies for Food Fabrication. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2015, 8, 1605–1615. [CrossRef] 3. Baishakhi, D.; Koushik, B.; Gt, K. Innovative Technologies in Tailoring Designer Food and Personalized Nutrition. Nov. Tech. Nutr. Food Sci. 2019, 2, 319–323. 4. Trumbo, P.; Schlicker, S.; Yates, A.A.; Poos, M. Dietary Reference Intakes for Energy, Carbohydrate, Fiber, Fat, Fatty Acids, Cholesterol, Protein and Amino Acids. J. Am. Diet Assoc. 2002, 102, 1621–1630. [CrossRef] 5. Soenen, S.; Bonomi, A.G.; Lemmens, S.G.T.; Scholte, J.; Thijssen, M.A.M.A.; Van Berkum, F.; Westerterp-Plantenga, M.S. Relatively high-protein or ‘low-carb’ energy-restricted diets for body weight loss and body weight maintenance? Physiol. Behav. 2012, 107, 374–380. [CrossRef] 6. Lejeune, M.P.G.M.; Kovacs, E.M.R.; Westerterp-Plantenga, M.S. Additional protein intake limits weight regain after weight loss in humans. Br. J. Nutr. 2005, 93, 281–289. [CrossRef] 7. Weigle, D.S.; Breen, P.A.; Matthys, C.C.; Callahan, H.S.; Meeuws, K.E.; Burden, V.R.; Purnell, J.Q. A high-protein diet induces sustained reductions in appetite, ad libitum caloric intake, and body weight despite compensatory changes in diurnal plasma leptin and ghrelin concentrations. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2005, 82, 41–48. [CrossRef] 8. Zhou, J.Z.; Zhang, H.; Gao, L.; Wang, L.; Qian, H.F. Influence of pH and ionic strength on heat-induced formation and rheological properties of cottonseed protein gels. Food Bioprod. Process. 2015, 96, 27–34. [CrossRef] 9. Frigolet, M.E.; Torres, N.; Tovar, A.R. Soya protein attenuates abnormalities of the renina-angiotensin system in adipose tissue from obese rats. Br. J. Nutr. 2012, 107, 36–44. [CrossRef] 10. Torres, N.; Torre-Villalvazo, I.; Tovar, A.R. Regulation of lipid metabolism by soy protein and its implication in diseases mediated by lipid disorders. J. Nutr. Biochem. 2006, 17, 365–373. [CrossRef] 11. Panasevich, M.R.; Schuster, C.M.; Phillips, K.E.; Meers, G.M.; Chintapalli, S.V.; Wankhade, U.D.; Shankar, K.; Butteiger, D.N.; Krul, E.S.; Thyfault, J.P.; et al. Soy compared with milk protein in a Western diet changes fecal microbiota and decreases hepatic steatosis in obese OLETF rats. J. Nutr. Biochem. 2017, 46, 125–136. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 12. Mirazimi, F.; Saldo, J.; Sepulcre, F.; Gràcia, A.; Pujolà, M. Enriched puree potato with soy protein for dysphagia patients by using 3D printing. Food Front. 2022, 1–10. [CrossRef] 13. Duda, A.; Jezowski, P.; Radzikowska, D.; Kowalczewski, P.L. Partial wheat flour replacement with gluten-free flours in bread- quality, texture and antioxidant activity. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. Food Sci. 2019, 9, 505–509. [CrossRef] 14. Belluco, S.; Losasso, C.; Maggioletti, M.; Alonzi, C.C.; Paoletti, M.G.; Ricci, A. Edible insects in a food safety and nutritional perspective: A critical review. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2013, 12, 296–313. [CrossRef] 15. Rumpold, B.A.; Schlüter, O.K. Nutritional composition and safety aspects of edible insects. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2013, 57, 802–823. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 16. Hall, F.G.; Jones, O.G.; O’Haire, M.E.; Liceaga, A.M. Functional properties of tropical banded cricket (Gryllodes sigillatus) protein hydrolysates. Food Chem. 2017, 224, 414–422. [CrossRef] 17. Abeyrathne, E.D.N.S.; Lee, H.Y.; Ahn, D.U. Egg white proteins and their potential use in food processing or as nutraceutical and pharmaceutical agents—A review. Poult. Sci. 2013, 92, 3292–3299. [CrossRef] 18. Mine, Y. Recent advances in the understanding of egg white protein functionality. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 1995, 6, 225–232. [CrossRef] 19. Mine, Y.; Noutomi, T.; Haga, N. Emulsifying and Structural Properties of Ovalbumin. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1991, 39, 443–446. [CrossRef] 20. Zicari, G.; Carraro, E.; Bonetta, S. The Regulation (EC) N. 1924/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods. Prog. Nutr. 2007, 404, 9–25. 21. Dankar, I.; Pujolà, M.; El Omar, F.; Sepulcre, F.; Haddarah, A. Impact of Mechanical and Microstructural Properties of Potato Puree-Food Additive Complexes on Extrusion-Based 3D Printing. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2018, 11, 2021–2031. 22. Tabilo-Munizaga, G.; Barbosa-Cánovas, G.V. Rheology for the food industry. J. Food Eng. 2005, 67, 147–156. [CrossRef] 23. Sungsinchai, S.; Niamnuy, C.; Wattanapan, P.; Charoenchaitrakool, M.; Devahastin, S. Texture Modification Technologies and Their Opportunities for the Production of Dysphagia Foods: A Review. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2019, 18, 1898–1912. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 24. Cappelli, A.; Oliva, N.; Bonaccorsi, G.; Lorini, C.; Cini, E. Assessment of the rheological properties and bread characteristics obtained by innovative protein sources (Cicer arietinum, Acheta domesticus, Tenebrio molitor): Novel food or potential improvers for wheat flour? LWT 2020, 118, 108867. [CrossRef] 25. Zhang, M.; Vora, A.; Han, W.J.; Wojtecki, R.; Maune, H.B.A.; Le, A.E.; Thompson, L.M.; McClelland, G.; Ribet, F.C.; Engler, A.; et al. Dual-Responsive Hydrogels for Direct-Write 3D Printing. Macromolecules 2015, 48, 6482–6488. [CrossRef] 26. Montoya, J.; Medina, J.; Molina, A.; Gutiérrez, J.; Rodríguez, B.; Marín, R. Impact of viscoelastic and structural properties from starch-mango and starch-arabinoxylans hydrocolloids in 3D food printing. Addit. Manuf. 2021, 39, 101891. [CrossRef] 27. Chen, J. Food oral processing—A review. Food Hydrocoll. 2009, 23, 1–25. [CrossRef] Foods 2022, 11, 2244 12 of 12 28. Sharma, M.; Kristo, E.; Corredig, M.; Duizer, L. Food Hydrocolloids Effect of hydrocolloid type on texture of pureed carrots: Rheological and sensory measures. Food Hydrocoll. 2017, 63, 478–487. [CrossRef] 29. Chen, W.; Hadde, E.K.; Chen, J. Development of a ball back extrusion technique for texture analysis of fluid food. J. Texture Stud. 2021, 52, 461–469. 30. Nasaruddin, F.; Chin, N.L.; Yusof, Y.A. Effect of processing on instrumental textural properties of traditional dodol using back extrusion. Int. J. Food Prop. 2012, 15, 495–506. [CrossRef] 31. Huang, M.; Kennedy, J.F.; Li, B.; Xu, X.; Xie, B.J. Characters of rice starch gel modified by gellan, carrageenan, and glucomannan: A texture profile analysis study. Carbohydr. Polym. 2007, 69, 411–418. [CrossRef] 32. Liu, Z.; Zhang, M.; Bhandari, B.; Yang, C. Impact of rheological properties of mashed potatoes on 3D printing. J. Food Eng. 2018, 220, 76–82. [CrossRef] 33. Liu, Z.; Bhandari, B.; Prakash, S.; Mantihal, S.; Zhang, M. Linking rheology and printability of a multicomponent gel system of carrageenan-xanthan-starch in extrusion based additive manufacturing. Food Hydrocoll. 2019, 87, 413–424. [CrossRef] 34. Qiu, R.; Wang, K.; Tian, H.; Liu, X.; Liu, G.; Hu, Z.; Zhao, L. Analysis on the printability and rheological characteristics of bigel inks: Potential in 3D food printing. Food Hydrocoll. 2022, 129, 107675. [CrossRef] 35. Xiong, W.; Ren, C.; Tian, M.; Yang, X.; Li, J.; Li, B. Complex coacervation of ovalbumin-carboxymethylcellulose assessed by isothermal titration calorimeter and rheology: Effect of ionic strength and charge density of polysaccharide. Food Hydrocoll. 2017, 73, 41–50. [CrossRef] 36. Dickinson, E. Hydrocolloids at interfaces and the influence on the properties of dispersed systems. Food Hydrocoll. 2003, 17, 25–39. [CrossRef] 37. Razi, S.M.; Motamedzadegan, A.; Shahidi, S.A.; Rashidinejad, A. Physical and Rheological Properties of Egg Albumin Foams Are Affected by Ionic Strength and Basil Seed Gum Supplementation. Int. J. Chem. Eng. 2019, 2019, 2502908. [CrossRef] 38. De Kruif, C.G.; Tuinier, R. Polysaccharide protein interactions. Food Hydrocoll. 2001, 15, 555–563. [CrossRef] 39. Polyakov, V.I.; Grinberg, V.Y.; Tolstoguzov, V.B. Thermodynamic incompatibility of proteins. Food Hydrocoll. 1997, 11, 171–180. [CrossRef] 40. Grinberg, V.Y.; Tolstoguzov, V.B. Thermodynamic incompatibility of proteins and polysaccharides in solutions. Food Hydrocoll. 1997, 11, 145–158. [CrossRef]