Sat, Dec 21, 2024
[Archive]
Volume 9, Issue 3 (Aug 2024)
JNFS 2024, 9(3): 529-538 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Chaudhary M, Singh R, Singh E S, Panwar B. Evaluating Proximate, Antinutrient, and Antioxidant Activity of Raw and Processed Quinoa (Chenopodium Quinoa Willd) Flour and Developing Food Products by Incorporating Them. JNFS 2024; 9 (3) :529-538
URL: http://jnfs.ssu.ac.ir/article-1-734-en.html
URL: http://jnfs.ssu.ac.ir/article-1-734-en.html
Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Banasthali Vidyapith, Tonk, Rajasthan – 304022, India.
Abstract: (858 Views)
This study evaluates proximate, antinutrient, and antioxidant activities of raw and processed quinoa flour (RQF and PQF). Product development and sensory evaluation were also addressed to provide prospects for human consumption. Methods: Quinoa was processed by two methods - soaking and roasting. Some nutrients like moisture, ash, protein, carbohydrate, crude fibre, fat, iron, calcium, vitamin C, phytic acid, saponins, total phenol, and 2,2-diphenylpicrylhydrazyl (DPPH) were analyzed. The recipes were made and conduct acceptability evaluation by a 9-point hedonic scale. The mean, standard deviation, and One-Way Analysis of Variance (proximate, antinutrient, antioxidant) were utilized as the statistical approach for the analysis of data. Results: The study revealed that some nutrient composition of RQF was found to be impressive with moisture (11%), ash (2.1%), protein (16.6%), crude fibre (2%), iron (11.6%), and calcium (76.1%) as compared to PQF; however, carbohydrate (69.9%), fat (9.6%), and vitamin C (9.1%) was increased in PQF, and phytic acid and saponins were decreased in all the PQF. DPPH’ free antioxidant potential was observed that RQF lowered free radical scavenging activity. In all PQF, the total phenol content was both raised and reduced. Also, proximate and antioxidant activity showed significant differences (P<0.05), and antinutrient analysis showed no significant differences (P>0.05). The two recipes were prepared as upma (soaked for 48 h), and chakli (roasted at 145 °C). Sample B of upma (50% semolina with 50% soaked quinoa flour) and sample A of chakli (75% refined flour with 25% roasted quinoa flour) were more acceptable. Conclusion: This study concluded that the use of domestic processing of quinoa seeds decreases some nutrient value compared with RQF and also infers the dietary importance of quinoa.
Type of article: orginal article |
Subject:
public specific
Received: 2022/10/10 | Published: 2024/08/20 | ePublished: 2024/08/20
Received: 2022/10/10 | Published: 2024/08/20 | ePublished: 2024/08/20
References
1. Alessandra B, Chandra S, Matteo P, Ivano M & Jeannette M 2002. Antioxidant activity of flavonoids from Licania licaniaeflora. Journal of ethnopharmacology 79 (3): 379-381.
2. Arendt EK & Zannini E 2013. Cereal Grains for the Food and Beverage Industries. Woodhead Publishing.
3. Arneja I, Tanwar B & Chauhan A 2015. Nutritional Composition and Health Benefits of Golden Grain of 21st Century, Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa willd): A Review. Pakistan journal of nutrition. 14 (12): 1034-1040.
4. Bhathal SK, Kaur N & Gill JPS 2017. Effect of processing on the nutritional composition of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd). Agricultural research journal. 54 (1): 90-93.
5. Collar C 2016. Quinoa. Academic press.
6. Contreras-Jimenez B, Torres-Vargas OL & Rodriguez-Garcia ME 2019. Physicochemical characterization of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) flour and isolated starch. Food chemistry. 298: 124982.
7. Davies NT & Reid H 1979. An evaluation of the phytate, zinc, copper, iron and manganese contents of, and Zn availability from, soya-based textured-vegetable-protein meat substitutes or meat-extenders. British journal of nutrition. 41 (3): 579-589.
8. Demir B & Bilgicli N 2021. Utilization of quinoa flour (Chenopodium quinoa Willd) in gluten-free pasta formulation: Effects on nutritional and sensory properties. Food science and technology international. 27 (3): 242-250.
9. El Hazzam K, et al. 2020. An Insight into Saponins from Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd): A Review. Molecules. 25 (5): 1059.
10. Gordillo-Bastidas E & Díaz-Rizzolo D 2016. Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd), from Nutritional Value to Potential Health Benefits: An Integrative Review. Journal of nutrition & food sciences. 6 (3): 497.
11. Graziano S, Agrimonti C, Marmiroli N & Gullì M 2022. Utilisation and limitations of pseudocereals (quinoa, amaranth, and buckwheat) in food production: A review. Trends in food science & technology. 125: 154-165.
12. Gurpreet Kaur D, Suresh B & Rajni G 2022. Quinoa flour as a functional ingredient for improving the nutritional value of maize flatbread. Pharma Innovation Journal. SP-11 (9): 3193-3199.
13. Hans H 2018. Development and Nutritional Evaluation of Gluten Free Bakery Products Using Pseudocereal quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa). International journal of pure & applied bioscience. 6 (2): 810-820.
14. Hernández-Ledesma B 2019. Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd) as source of bioactive compounds: a review. Bioactive compounds in health and disease. 2 (3): 2747.
15. Irigoyen R & Giner S 2017. Modeling thin layer drying-roasting kinetics of soaked quinoa. Coupled mass and energy transfer. Biosystems engineering. 157: 99-108.
16. Kaur I, Tanwar B, Reddy M & Chauhan A 2016. Vitamin C, total polyphenols and antioxidant activity in raw, domestically processed and industrially processed Indian Chenopodium quinoa seeds. Journal of applied pharmaceutical science. 6 (4): 139-145.
17. Kemp SE 2008. Application of sensory evaluation in food research. International journal of food science & technology. 43 (9): 1507-1511.
18. Kuktaite R, et al. 2022. Innovatively processed quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd) food: chemistry, structure and end-use characteristics. Journal of the science of food and agriculture. 102 (12): 5065-5076.
19. Lim J 2011. Hedonic scaling: A review of methods and theory. Food quality and preference. 22 (8): 733-747.
20. Marmouzi I, El Madani N, Charrouf Z, Cherrah Y & El Abbes Faouzi MY 2015. Proximate analysis, fatty acids and mineral composition of processed Moroccan Chenopodium quinoa Willd and antioxidant properties according to the polarity. Phytothérapie. 13 (2): 110-117.
21. Martinez-Villaluenga C, Penas E & Hernandez-Ledesma B 2020. Pseudocereal grains: Nutritional value, health benefits and current applications for the development of gluten-free foods. Food and chemical toxicology. 137: 111178.
22. Mian Kamran S, Masood SB, Hafiz RS & Nasir aM 2017. Chapter-14 Sensory evalution and consumer acceptability. In Handbook of Food Science and Technology (ed. J. Romain, C. Thomas, S. Pierre and B. Gérard), pp. 362-386.
23. Milica P & Uma T 2021. Innovative processing technologies for healthy grains. Wiley-Blackwell.
24. Navruz-Varli S & Sanlier N 2016. Nutritional and health benefits of quinoa ( Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Journal of cereal science. 69: 371-376.
25. Nowak V, Du J & Charrondiere UR 2016. Assessment of the nutritional composition of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd). Food chemistry. 193: 47-54.
26. Obadoni O & Ochuko P 2002. Phytochemical studies and comparative efficacy of the crude extracts of some haemostatic plants in Edo and Delta States of Nigeria. Global journal of pure and applied sciences. 8 (2): 203-208.
27. Ogungbenle HN 2003. Nutritional evaluation and functional properties of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) flour. International journal of food sciences and nutrition. 54 (2): 153-158.
28. Pirzadah TB & Malik B 2020. Pseudocereals as super foods of 21st century: Recent technological interventions. Journal of agriculture and food research. 2: 100052.
29. Raghuramulu N, Nair K & Kalyanasundaram S 2003. A manual of Laboratory Techniques. National Institute of Nutrition: India.
30. Schmidt D, Verruma-Bernardi MR, Forti VA & Borges MTMR 2021. Quinoa and Amaranth as Functional Foods: A Review. Food reviews international. 59 (4): 2277-2296.
31. Sharma S 2007. Experiments and Techniques in Biochemistry. Galgotia publications: New Delhi.
32. Shi J, et al. 2004. Saponins from edible legumes: chemistry, processing, and health benefits. Journal of medicinal food. 7 (1): 67-78.
33. Slinkard K & Singleton V 1977. Total Phenol Analysis: Automation and Comparison with Manual Methods. American journal of enology and viticulture. 28: 49-55.
34. Steel RGD & Torrie JH 1980. Principles and procedures of statistics. A biometrical approach. McGraw-Hill Book Company: New York.
35. Thakur P, et al. 2021a. Effect of soaking and germination treatments on nutritional, anti-nutritional, and bioactive properties of amaranth (Amaranthus hypodevelopndriacus L.), quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa L.), and buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum L.). Current research in food sciences. 4: 917-925.
36. Thakur P, Kumar K & Dhaliwal HS 2021b. Nutritional facts, bio-active components and processing aspects of pseudocereals: A comprehensive review. Food bioscience. 42: 101170.
37. Vilcacundo R & Hernández-Ledesma B 2017. Nutritional and biological value of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd). Current opinion in food science. 14: 1-6.
38. Yadav S, Srivastava S & Chauhan E 2018. Nutraceutical Potential And Sensory Evaluation Of Papad Prepared From Seeds Powder. Iaetsd journal for advanced research in appllied sciences. 5 (2): 732-737.
39. Zhu F 2020. Dietary fiber polysaccharides of amaranth, buckwheat and quinoa grains: A review of chemical structure, biological functions and food uses. Carbohydrate polymers. 248: 116819.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
