Optimization and Evaluation of Finger Millet-common Bean Flour Blending for Better Nutritional and Sensory Acceptability of Porridge

Wabi Bajo; Alemayehu Gudisa; Yohannes Nugusu

doi:doi:10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11

| Peer-Reviewed

Optimization and Evaluation of Finger Millet-common Bean Flour Blending for Better Nutritional and Sensory Acceptability of Porridge

Wabi Bajo, Alemayehu Gudisa, Yohannes Nugusu

Published in Modern Chemistry (Volume 9, Issue 1)

Received: 23 August 2020 Accepted: 4 September 2020 Published: 10 February 2021

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

This study was conducted to evaluate the nutritional quality and sensory acceptability of porridge formulated from different proportions of finger millet (F. M.) and common bean (C. B.) composite flours. The objective of the study was to enhance nutritional quality of porridge by incorporating common bean flour in finger millet, and thus to enhance beans utilization in Ethiopia. The art of food formulation is currently the best way to complement the nutritional contents of cereals and legumes, and widely applied in developing countries. Functional properties and proximate compositions of the composite flours were characterized following AOAC method and Abiodun and Kusumayanti methods respectively. Five different porridges were prepared from different proportions of the flours using mixture design (50%F. M: 50%C. B, 62.5%F. M: 37.5%C. B, 100%F. M, 87.5F. M%: 12.5C. B and 75%F. M: 25%C. B), and sensory properties like colour, mouth-feel, aroma taste and overall acceptability of porridges were evaluated using a 5-point Hedonic scales. Proximate compositions result was ranged from 7.90-9.091% (moisture), 10.21-14.486% (protein), 1.52-7.48% (crude fiber), 2.208-3.449% (ash), 65.271-76.38% (carbohydrate) and 330.95-356.610 Kcal/100g (calorie/energy value). The result of functional properties was ranged from 0.725-0.921g/mg, 117.50-155.10g/g, 120.36-145.83g/g, 6.038-14.530% and 65.167-77.33% for bulk density, water absorption capacity, swelling power, water solubility index and despersibility respectively. The composite flours were also found to have mineral contents of (2136.5-3118.1, 2904.5-6926.8, 1822.2-5548.6, 112.57-156.18, 250.1-449.099 and 21.31-24.54) mg/kg for Ca, K, P, S, Fe and Zn respectively. The result of sensory showed that the porridges were evaluated for appearance or colour, aroma, taste, mouth-feel and overall acceptability were found to have 3.57-3.38, 3.29-3.97, 3.12-3.48, 3.49-3.80 and 3.38-4.17 for respective attributes. It was observed that the difference between the treatments (formulations) was not significant (P>0.05) for other sensory attributes except, aroma and overall acceptability of the porridge. However, the nutritional and functional properties of the composite flours showed significant differences among the treatments. In general, it was concluded that 50%FM to 50%CB ratios resulted in the highest protein content of the composite flour whereas the porridge with acceptable quality could be prepared from composite flours of 87.5% F. M and 12.5% C. B.

Published in	Modern Chemistry (Volume 9, Issue 1)
DOI	10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11
Page(s)	1-7
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Functional Properties, Proximate Composition, Sensory Evaluation, Common Bean, Porridge, Finger Millet

References

[1]	P. Glewwe and E. A. Miguel, “THE IMPACT OF CHILD HEALTH AND NUTRITION ON EDUCATION IN LESS DEVELOPED COUNTRIES,” vol. 4, no. 07, 2008.
[2]	R. S. Gibson, E. L. Ferguson, and J. Lehrfeld, “Complementary foods for infant feeding in developing countries : their nutrient adequacy and improvement,” no. June, pp. 764–770, 1998.
[3]	N. A. C. A. A. A.. Okoye J. T, “CHEMICAL COMPOSITION AND FUNCTIONAL PROPERTIES OF KIDNEY BEAN/WHEAT FLOUR BLENDS.,” vol. 2, pp. 27–32, 2008.
[4]	M. Siddiq, R. Ravi, J. B. Harte, and K. D. Dolan, “LWT - Food Science and Technology Physical and functional characteristics of selected dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) flours,” LWT - Food Sci. Technol., vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 232–237, 2010.
[5]	N. Petry, E. Boy, J. P. Wirth, and R. F. Hurrell, “as a Vehicle for Iron Biofortification,” no. Id, pp. 1144–1173, 2015.
[6]	M. W. Blair, L. F. Gonza, P. M. Kimani, and L. Butare, “Genetic diversity, inter-gene pool introgression and nutritional quality of common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) from Central Africa,” pp. 237–248, 2010.
[7]	R. M. Welch, W. A. House, S. Beebe, and Z. Cheng, “Genetic Selection for Enhanced Bioavailable Levels of Iron in Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Seeds †,” pp. 3576–3580, 2000.
[8]	R. V Jaybhaye, I. L. Pardeshi, P. C. Vengaiah, and P. P. Srivastav, “Processing and Technology for Millet Based Food Products : A Review Nutrient Composition of Millets,” vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 32–48, 2014.
[9]	V. Verma and S. Patel, “Value added products from nutri-cereals: Finger millet (,” vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 169–176, 2013.
[10]	S. E. Ramashia, T. A. Anyasi, E. T. Gwata, S. Meddows-taylor, A. Israel, and O. Jideani, “Processing, nutritional composition and health benefits of finger millet in sub-saharan Africa,” vol. 2061, no. June, pp. 253–266, 2019.
[11]	B. Kandlakunta and S. D. Golla, Nutritional and Health Benefits of Millets, no. August. 2017.
[12]	A. Lartey, A. Manu, K. H. Brown, J. M. Peerson, and K. G. Dewey, “A randomized, community-based trial of the effects of improved, centrally processed complementary foods on growth and micro- nutrient status of Ghanaian infants from 6 to 12 mo of age 1 – 3,” pp. 391–404, 1999.
[13]	M. Faber, J. D. Kvalsvig, C. J. Lombard, and A. J. S. Benadé, “Effect of a fortified maize-meal porridge on anemia, micronutrient status, and motor development of infants 1–3,” no. 2, pp. 1032–1039, 2005.
[14]	O. A. Abiodun, R. Akinoso, and O. J. Oluoti, “Changes in Functional and Pasting Properties of Trifoliate Yam Flour during Storage,” J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Manag., 2014.
[15]	H. Kusumayanti, N. A. Handayani, and H. Santosa, “ScienceDirect Swelling power and water solubility of cassava and sweet potatoes flour,” vol. 23, no. Ictcred 2014, pp. 164–167, 2015.
[16]	AOAC, “AOAC: Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Oficial Methods of Analysis,” Assoc. Off. Agric. Chem., vol. 1, 1990.
[17]	A. T. Adeolu and D. O. Enesi, “Assessment of proximate, mineral, vitamin and phytochemical compositions of plantain (Musa paradisiaca) bract – an agricultural waste,” vol. 4, no. 7, pp. 192–197, 2013.
[18]	P. Ruperez*, “Mineral content of edible marine seaweeds,” Dep. Metab. Nutr. Inst. del FrÃ ´o, Super. Counc. Sci. Res. (CSIC), Ciudad Univ. s / n, 28040-Madrid, Spain, vol. 79, pp. 23–26, 2020.
[19]	A. Gull, K. Prasad, and P. Kumar, “Physico-chemical, Functional and Antioxidant Properties of Millet Flours,” no. March, 2015.
[20]	N. Khetarpaul, R. Goyal, and R. Garg, “NUTRITIOUS PORRIDGE PREPARED USING,” vol. 17, pp. 309–315, 2004.
[21]	A. S. M. Saleh, Q. Zhang, J. Chen, and Q. Shen, “Millet Grains : Nutritional Quality, Processing, and Potential Health Benefits,” vol. 12, pp. 281–295, 2013.
[22]	J. E. Cade, V. J. Burley, and D. C. Greenwood, “Dietary fibre and risk of breast cancer in the U.K. Women’s Cohort Study,” 2007.
[23]	P. Singh and R. S. Raghuvanshi, “Finger millet for food and nutritional security,” vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 77–84, 2012.
[24]	H. A. Hassan, A. I. Mustafa, and A. R. Ahmed, “Effect of incorporation of decorticated pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) protein isolate on functional, baking and sensory characteristics of Wheat (Triticum aesitivum) biscuit,” vol. 5, no. 8, pp. 976–981, 2013.
[25]	K. D. Kulkarni, N. Govinden, and D. Kulkarni, “Production and use of raw potato flour in Mauritian traditional foods,” vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 1–8, 1996.
[26]	P. Sriburi and S. E. Hill, “Extrusion of cassava starch with either variations in ascorbic acid concentration or pH,” pp. 141–154, 2000.
[27]	L. Wang and P. A. Seib, “Australian Salt-Noodle Flours and Their Starches Compared to U. S. Wheat Flours and Their Starches ’,” vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 167–175, 1996.
[28]	J. Ruales and S. Valencia, “Effect of Processing on the Physico-Chemical Characteristics of Quinoa Flour (Chenopodium),” 1993.
[29]	O. O. Awolu, “Optimization of the functional characteristics, pasting and rheological properties of pearl millet-based composite flour,” Heliyon, no. February, p. e00240, 2017.
[30]	K. O. Falade and C. A. Okafor, “Physical, functional, and pasting properties of flours from corms of two Cocoyam (Colocasia esculenta and Xanthosoma sagittifolium) cultivars,” vol. 52, no. June, pp. 3440–3448, 2015.
[31]	E. R. A. Milene Marquezi, Vanessa Maria Gervin, Lucas Bertoldi Watanabe, Rodolfo Moresco, “Chemical and functional properties of different common Brazilian bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivars,” Brazilian J. Food Technol., vol. 20, 2017.
[32]	G. Tumwine, A. Atukwase, G. A. Tumuhimbise, F. Tucungwirwe, and A. Linnemann, “Production of nutrient- enhanced millet- based composite flour using skimmed milk powder and vegetables,” no. July 2018, pp. 22–34, 2019.
[33]	S. S. Audu, M. O. Aremu, and B. W. Tukura, “Chemical composition of finger millet (Eleusine coracana) flour,” no. October, 2018.
[34]	C. Tortoe et al., “Assessing the sensory characteristics and consumer preferences of yam-cowpea-soybean porridge in the Accra Metropolitan Area,” vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 127–132, 2014.
[35]	I. C. Onoja, U.S. and Obizoba, “Nutrient Composition and Organoleptic Attributes of Gruel Based on Fermented Cereal, Legume, Tuber and Root Flour.,” J. Trop. Agric. Food, Environ. Ext., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 162–168, 2009.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Wabi Bajo, Alemayehu Gudisa, Yohannes Nugusu. (2021). Optimization and Evaluation of Finger Millet-common Bean Flour Blending for Better Nutritional and Sensory Acceptability of Porridge. Modern Chemistry, 9(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Wabi Bajo; Alemayehu Gudisa; Yohannes Nugusu. Optimization and Evaluation of Finger Millet-common Bean Flour Blending for Better Nutritional and Sensory Acceptability of Porridge. Mod. Chem. 2021, 9(1), 1-7. doi: 10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Wabi Bajo, Alemayehu Gudisa, Yohannes Nugusu. Optimization and Evaluation of Finger Millet-common Bean Flour Blending for Better Nutritional and Sensory Acceptability of Porridge. Mod Chem. 2021;9(1):1-7. doi: 10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11,
  author = {Wabi Bajo and Alemayehu Gudisa and Yohannes Nugusu},
  title = {Optimization and Evaluation of Finger Millet-common Bean Flour Blending for Better Nutritional and Sensory Acceptability of Porridge},
  journal = {Modern Chemistry},
  volume = {9},
  number = {1},
  pages = {1-7},
  doi = {10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.mc.20210901.11},
  abstract = {This study was conducted to evaluate the nutritional quality and sensory acceptability of porridge formulated from different proportions of finger millet (F. M.) and common bean (C. B.) composite flours. The objective of the study was to enhance nutritional quality of porridge by incorporating common bean flour in finger millet, and thus to enhance beans utilization in Ethiopia. The art of food formulation is currently the best way to complement the nutritional contents of cereals and legumes, and widely applied in developing countries. Functional properties and proximate compositions of the composite flours were characterized following AOAC method and Abiodun and Kusumayanti methods respectively. Five different porridges were prepared from different proportions of the flours using mixture design (50%F. M: 50%C. B, 62.5%F. M: 37.5%C. B, 100%F. M, 87.5F. M%: 12.5C. B and 75%F. M: 25%C. B), and sensory properties like colour, mouth-feel, aroma taste and overall acceptability of porridges were evaluated using a 5-point Hedonic scales. Proximate compositions result was ranged from 7.90-9.091% (moisture), 10.21-14.486% (protein), 1.52-7.48% (crude fiber), 2.208-3.449% (ash), 65.271-76.38% (carbohydrate) and 330.95-356.610 Kcal/100g (calorie/energy value). The result of functional properties was ranged from 0.725-0.921g/mg, 117.50-155.10g/g, 120.36-145.83g/g, 6.038-14.530% and 65.167-77.33% for bulk density, water absorption capacity, swelling power, water solubility index and despersibility respectively. The composite flours were also found to have mineral contents of (2136.5-3118.1, 2904.5-6926.8, 1822.2-5548.6, 112.57-156.18, 250.1-449.099 and 21.31-24.54) mg/kg for Ca, K, P, S, Fe and Zn respectively. The result of sensory showed that the porridges were evaluated for appearance or colour, aroma, taste, mouth-feel and overall acceptability were found to have 3.57-3.38, 3.29-3.97, 3.12-3.48, 3.49-3.80 and 3.38-4.17 for respective attributes. It was observed that the difference between the treatments (formulations) was not significant (P>0.05) for other sensory attributes except, aroma and overall acceptability of the porridge. However, the nutritional and functional properties of the composite flours showed significant differences among the treatments. In general, it was concluded that 50%FM to 50%CB ratios resulted in the highest protein content of the composite flour whereas the porridge with acceptable quality could be prepared from composite flours of 87.5% F. M and 12.5% C. B.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY - JOUR
T1 - Optimization and Evaluation of Finger Millet-common Bean Flour Blending for Better Nutritional and Sensory Acceptability of Porridge
AU - Wabi Bajo
AU - Alemayehu Gudisa
AU - Yohannes Nugusu
Y1 - 2021/02/10
PY - 2021
N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11
DO - 10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11
T2 - Modern Chemistry
JF - Modern Chemistry
JO - Modern Chemistry
SP - 1
EP - 7
PB - Science Publishing Group
SN - 2329-180X
UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11
AB - This study was conducted to evaluate the nutritional quality and sensory acceptability of porridge formulated from different proportions of finger millet (F. M.) and common bean (C. B.) composite flours. The objective of the study was to enhance nutritional quality of porridge by incorporating common bean flour in finger millet, and thus to enhance beans utilization in Ethiopia. The art of food formulation is currently the best way to complement the nutritional contents of cereals and legumes, and widely applied in developing countries. Functional properties and proximate compositions of the composite flours were characterized following AOAC method and Abiodun and Kusumayanti methods respectively. Five different porridges were prepared from different proportions of the flours using mixture design (50%F. M: 50%C. B, 62.5%F. M: 37.5%C. B, 100%F. M, 87.5F. M%: 12.5C. B and 75%F. M: 25%C. B), and sensory properties like colour, mouth-feel, aroma taste and overall acceptability of porridges were evaluated using a 5-point Hedonic scales. Proximate compositions result was ranged from 7.90-9.091% (moisture), 10.21-14.486% (protein), 1.52-7.48% (crude fiber), 2.208-3.449% (ash), 65.271-76.38% (carbohydrate) and 330.95-356.610 Kcal/100g (calorie/energy value). The result of functional properties was ranged from 0.725-0.921g/mg, 117.50-155.10g/g, 120.36-145.83g/g, 6.038-14.530% and 65.167-77.33% for bulk density, water absorption capacity, swelling power, water solubility index and despersibility respectively. The composite flours were also found to have mineral contents of (2136.5-3118.1, 2904.5-6926.8, 1822.2-5548.6, 112.57-156.18, 250.1-449.099 and 21.31-24.54) mg/kg for Ca, K, P, S, Fe and Zn respectively. The result of sensory showed that the porridges were evaluated for appearance or colour, aroma, taste, mouth-feel and overall acceptability were found to have 3.57-3.38, 3.29-3.97, 3.12-3.48, 3.49-3.80 and 3.38-4.17 for respective attributes. It was observed that the difference between the treatments (formulations) was not significant (P>0.05) for other sensory attributes except, aroma and overall acceptability of the porridge. However, the nutritional and functional properties of the composite flours showed significant differences among the treatments. In general, it was concluded that 50%FM to 50%CB ratios resulted in the highest protein content of the composite flour whereas the porridge with acceptable quality could be prepared from composite flours of 87.5% F. M and 12.5% C. B.
VL - 9
IS - 1
ER -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Wabi Bajo

Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Adama, Ethiopia
Alemayehu Gudisa

Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Adama, Ethiopia
Yohannes Nugusu

Faculty of Veterinary & Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Wabi Bajo, Alemayehu Gudisa, Yohannes Nugusu. (2021). Optimization and Evaluation of Finger Millet-common Bean Flour Blending for Better Nutritional and Sensory Acceptability of Porridge. Modern Chemistry, 9(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Wabi Bajo; Alemayehu Gudisa; Yohannes Nugusu. Optimization and Evaluation of Finger Millet-common Bean Flour Blending for Better Nutritional and Sensory Acceptability of Porridge. Mod. Chem. 2021, 9(1), 1-7. doi: 10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Wabi Bajo, Alemayehu Gudisa, Yohannes Nugusu. Optimization and Evaluation of Finger Millet-common Bean Flour Blending for Better Nutritional and Sensory Acceptability of Porridge. Mod Chem. 2021;9(1):1-7. doi: 10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11,
  author = {Wabi Bajo and Alemayehu Gudisa and Yohannes Nugusu},
  title = {Optimization and Evaluation of Finger Millet-common Bean Flour Blending for Better Nutritional and Sensory Acceptability of Porridge},
  journal = {Modern Chemistry},
  volume = {9},
  number = {1},
  pages = {1-7},
  doi = {10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.mc.20210901.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.mc.20210901.11},
  abstract = {This study was conducted to evaluate the nutritional quality and sensory acceptability of porridge formulated from different proportions of finger millet (F. M.) and common bean (C. B.) composite flours. The objective of the study was to enhance nutritional quality of porridge by incorporating common bean flour in finger millet, and thus to enhance beans utilization in Ethiopia. The art of food formulation is currently the best way to complement the nutritional contents of cereals and legumes, and widely applied in developing countries. Functional properties and proximate compositions of the composite flours were characterized following AOAC method and Abiodun and Kusumayanti methods respectively. Five different porridges were prepared from different proportions of the flours using mixture design (50%F. M: 50%C. B, 62.5%F. M: 37.5%C. B, 100%F. M, 87.5F. M%: 12.5C. B and 75%F. M: 25%C. B), and sensory properties like colour, mouth-feel, aroma taste and overall acceptability of porridges were evaluated using a 5-point Hedonic scales. Proximate compositions result was ranged from 7.90-9.091% (moisture), 10.21-14.486% (protein), 1.52-7.48% (crude fiber), 2.208-3.449% (ash), 65.271-76.38% (carbohydrate) and 330.95-356.610 Kcal/100g (calorie/energy value). The result of functional properties was ranged from 0.725-0.921g/mg, 117.50-155.10g/g, 120.36-145.83g/g, 6.038-14.530% and 65.167-77.33% for bulk density, water absorption capacity, swelling power, water solubility index and despersibility respectively. The composite flours were also found to have mineral contents of (2136.5-3118.1, 2904.5-6926.8, 1822.2-5548.6, 112.57-156.18, 250.1-449.099 and 21.31-24.54) mg/kg for Ca, K, P, S, Fe and Zn respectively. The result of sensory showed that the porridges were evaluated for appearance or colour, aroma, taste, mouth-feel and overall acceptability were found to have 3.57-3.38, 3.29-3.97, 3.12-3.48, 3.49-3.80 and 3.38-4.17 for respective attributes. It was observed that the difference between the treatments (formulations) was not significant (P>0.05) for other sensory attributes except, aroma and overall acceptability of the porridge. However, the nutritional and functional properties of the composite flours showed significant differences among the treatments. In general, it was concluded that 50%FM to 50%CB ratios resulted in the highest protein content of the composite flour whereas the porridge with acceptable quality could be prepared from composite flours of 87.5% F. M and 12.5% C. B.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download