Abstracting and Indexing

  • Google Scholar
  • CrossRef
  • WorldCat
  • ResearchGate
  • Academic Keys
  • DRJI
  • Microsoft Academic
  • Index Copernicus
  • Academia.edu
  • OpenAIRE

Development, Organoleptic Evaluation and Acceptability of Products Developed by Incorporating Foxtail Millet

Article Information

Zainab Fatima* and Avanti Rao

Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, Madina Degree and PG College for Women, Hyderabad, India

*Corresponding Author: Zainab Fatima, Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, Madina Degree and PG College for Women, Hyderabad, India

Received: 10 May 2019; Accepted: 22 May 2019; Published: 14 June 2019

Citation: Zainab Fatima and Avanti Rao. Development, Organoleptic Evaluation and Acceptability of Products Developed by Incorporating Foxtail Millet. Journal of Food Science and Nutrition Research 2 (2019): 128-135.

View / Download Pdf

Abstract

Millets have been neglected despite the nutritive value and therapeutic use. Foxtail millet is highly nutritious, non-glutinous and non-acid forming food. They are a rich source of protein, fiber and neutraceutical components. Hence, they are soothing and easy to digest. The aim of the present study was to incorporate foxtail millet into six different recipes namingly, laddu, peanut chutney, panjeri, kheer, cutlet and chakli. Among these chakli was excluded due to its less acceptability. Remaining five recipes laddu, panjeri, kheer, cutlet, peanut chutney were well accepted. The products were evaluated by numerical scoring by 38 semi-trained panelists to asses overall acceptability. While considering these products, the highest score for overall acceptability was 84.2 for variation 1 in case of laddu, then 83.4 for variation 1 in case of kheer, 83.4 for variation 2 in case of panjeri and 82.6 for variation 1 in case of peanut chutney. The most acceptable products, namely laddu, kheer, peanut chutney, panjeri were subjected to hedonic rating test with 51 semi-trained panelists. The result showed that in case of kheer, variation 2 was more acceptable with the score of (8.10 ± 0.92) followed by (7.96 ± 0.85) for variation 1. In case of laddu, variation 2 was more acceptable with the score of (8.75 ± 0.52) followed by (8.33 ± 0.65) for variation 1. In case of peanut chutney, variation 1 was more acceptable with the score of (8.10 ± 0.67) followed by (7.94 ± 0.95) for variation 2. In case of panjeri, variation 2 was more acceptable with the score of (8.37 ± 0.85) followed by (8.16 ± 0.83) for variation 1. Data was analyzed using ANOVA, which shows a significant difference between variation 1 and variation 2 of laddu and kheer at 1% and 5% level of significance and no significant difference was observed between variation 1 and variation 2 of peanut chutney and panjeri at 1% and 5% level of significance. Hence, from the present study it can be concluded that foxtail millet can easily be incorporated into various recipes without affecting the sensory and nutritional qualities.

Keywords

Foxtail millet, Laddu, Panjeri, Kheer, Peanut chutney, Cutlet

Article Details

1. Introduction

Triggered by increasing industrialization, urbanization and the phenomenon of “Working women”, recent years have witnessed a spurt in the growth of the convenience foods market and breath-taking changes have taken place both in terms of quality and quantity (variety) of convenience products available, and the packaging as well as the processing technologies involved [1-2]. Among the minor millets, Foxtail millet has been tried by several workers in the development of various foods, which include bread [3], cakes [4], traditional foods [5-6], weaning foods [7-8], popped, extruded, roller-dried and flaked products [9], noodles [10]. The foxtail millet rice can be used instead of rice in the preparation of all the traditional products like bisibele bath, chakkali, pongal, dosa, idli, and laddus. Thus, besides its traditional use in making chapatti and porridge, millet can be exploited for the development of low GI therapeutic food products like biscuits. The nutritional composition of Foxtail millet per 100 gm is fat (4.3 gm), minerals (3 gm), protein (12.3 gm), calcium (31 mg %), carbohydrate (60.9 gm), phosphorous (290 mg%) and dietary fibre (14 gm). The amino acid profile is balanced and the dietary fiber content is very high compared to other cereals. Further studies are needed to determine long term effects of consumption of foxtail millet biscuits on blood lipid profile and glycosylated haemoglobin of diabetics and cardiovascular patients. Even though the nutritional qualities of millet have been well recorded [11], its utilization for food is confined to the traditional consumers in tribal populations, mainly due to non-availability of consumer-friendly, ready-to-use or ready-to-eat products, as are found for rice and wheat [12]. In recent times, there has been a renewed interest in millets. This study was conducted to incorporate foxtail millet in commonly consumed food recipes.
 

2. Materials and Methods

Foxtail millets were procured from a supermarket named BALAJI at Basheer bagh, Hyderabad. The raw materials required for the preparation of the products were procured from local markets of abids, Hyderabad.
 

2.1 Standardization of the recipe

Standardization is the process where a recipe is tested number of times and found a satisfactory quantity and yield. It is a gradual trial process. The standardization procedure was carried out by repeated trials till an acceptable recipe for the preparation of the product was obtained. The amounts were finalized by assessing the appearance, texture and taste of the variations. The finalized products were laddu, panjeri, kheer, cutlet, peanut chutney [5] (Figures 1-5 and Tables 1-5). Amounts of all the ingredients in the formulation of different products,
 

Basic

Variation I

Variation II

Ingredient

Quantity

Ingredient

Quantity

Ingredient

Quantity

Milk

200 ml

Milk

200 ml

Milk

200 ml

Rice

30 g

Rice

20 g

Rice

10 g

-

-

Foxtail Millet

10 g

Foxtail Millet

20 g

Sugar

100 g

Sugar

100 g

Sugar

100 g

Resin

10 g

Resin

10 g

Resin

10 g

Cashew

10 g

Cashew

10 g

Cashew

10 g

Ghee

10 g

Ghee

10 g

Ghee

10 g

Table 1: Ingredient and amount used in the development of Kheer.
 

Basic

Variation I

Variation II

Ingredient

Quantity

Ingredient

Quantity

Ingredient

Quantity

Peanuts

30 g

Peanuts

20 g

Peanuts

10 g

-

-

Foxtail Millet

10 g

Foxtail Millet

20 g

Cumin seeds

10 g

Cumin seeds

10 g

Cumin seeds

10 g

Curry Leaves

10 g

Curry Leaves

10 g

Curry Leaves

10 g

Oil

5-10 ml

Oil

5-10 ml

Oil

5-10 ml

Table 2: Ingredient and amount used in the development of Peanut Chutney.
 

Basic

Variation I

Variation II

Ingredient

Quantity

Ingredient

Quantity

Ingredient

Quantity

Potatoes

200 g

Potatoes

150 g

Potatoes

100 g

Onion

50 g

Onion

50 g

Onion

50 g

-

-

Foxtail Millet

50 g

Foxtail Millet

100 g

Coriander

10 g

Coriander

10 g

Coriander

10 g

Green Chilly

10 g

Green Chilly

10 g

Green Chilly

10 g

Oil

20 ml

Oil

20 ml

Oil

20 ml

Table 3: Ingredient and amount used in the development of Cutlet.
 

Basic

Variation I

Variation II

Ingredient

Quantity

Ingredient

Quantity

Ingredient

Quantity

Wheat Flour

100 g

Wheat Flour

100 g

Wheat Flour

100 g

Besan

100 g

Besan

50 g

Besan

25g

Sugar

100 g

Sugar

100 g

Sugar

100 g

-

-

Foxtail Millet

150 g

Foxtail Millet

175 g

Almonds

50 g

Almonds

50 g

Almonds

50 g

Ghee

50 g

Ghee

50 g

Ghee

50 g

Honey

20g

Honey

20 g

Honey

20 g

Table 4: Ingredient and amount used in the development of laddu.
 

Basic

Variation I

Variation II

Ingredient

Quantity

Ingredient

Quantity

Ingredient

Quantity

Powdered Almond

50 g

Powdered Almond

50 g

Powdered Almond

50 g

Powdered Cashew

50 g

Powdered Cashew

50 g

Powdered Cashew

50 g

-

-

Foxtail Millet

50 g

Foxtail Millet

75 g

Powdered Pista

50 g

Powdered Pista

50 g

Powdered Pista

50 g

Powdered Walnut

50 g

Powdered Walnut

50 g

Powdered Walnut

50 g

Sugar

100 g

Sugar

100 g

Sugar

100 g

Ghee

100 g

Ghee

100 g

Ghee

100 g

Powdered Makhana

50 g

Powdered Makhana

50 g

Powdered Makhana

50 g

Table 5: Ingredient and amount used in the development of Panjeri.
 

2.2 Method of preparation

image

Figure 1: Method of preparation of Kheer (basic).
 

2.2.1 Variations: To the above recipe, soaked, roasted and coarsely grounded foxtail millet was added along with grounded rice flour in variation 1 and 2.

image

Figure 2: Method of preparation of Peanut Chutney (basic).
 

2.2.2 Variation: To the above recipe, soaked, roasted and finely grounded foxtail millet was added along with grounded peanuts in variation 1 and 2.

image

Figure 3: Method of preparation of Cutlet (basic).
 

2.2.3 Variation: To the above recipe, pressure-cooked and mashed foxtail millet was added along with potatoes in variation 1 and 2.

image

Figure 4: Method of preparation of Laddu.
 

2.2.4 Variation: To the above recipe, finely grounded foxtail millet was added along with wheat flour and besan of variation 1 and 2.

image

Figure 5: Method of preparation of Panjeri (basic).
 

2.2.5 Variation: To the above recipe, finely grounded and roasted foxtail millet was added along with other dry fruit powders in variation 1 and 2.

2.3 Sensory evaluation of the developed products

The sensory evaluation of the five developed samples (laddu, kheer, panjeri, cutlet, peanut chutney) was carried out by 38 semi-trained panelists for numerical scoring and 51 semi-trained panelists made hedonic evaluation of the samples and were asked to assess the laddu, kheer, panjeri, peanut chutney for overall acceptability based on the appearance, color, taste, flavor and texture.
 

3. Results and Discussion

It was found that the mean score of kheer for color of variation 2 (8.27 ± 0.85) was greater than variation 1( 8.10 ± 0.03). The flavor of variation 2 (8.02 ± 0.95) was greater than variation 1 (7.82 ± 0.95). The texture of variation 2 (8.06 ± 0.88) was greater than variation 1 (8.20 ± 1.02). The taste of variation 2 (8.02 ± 0.95) was greater than variation 1 (7.86 ± 0.96). The overall acceptability of variation 2 (8.10 ± 0.92) was greater than variation 1 (7.96 ± 0.85). The data was analyzed using analysis of variance ANOVA test and the calculated value is (11.60) which is more than the table value. Hence, there was significant difference observed at 1% and 5% level of significance. The mean score for peanut chutney given by the panelists for color for variation 1 (8.14 ± 0.72) is greater than variation 2 (8.06 ± 0.92). The flavor of variation 1 (7.96 ± 0.75) is greater than variation 2 (7.92 ± 0.91). The texture where variation 1 (8.04 ± 0.80) is greater than variation 2 (7.92 ± 1.06). The taste where variation 1 (8.06 ± 0.79) is greater than variation 2 (7.82 ± 0.93). The overall acceptability for variation 1 (8.10 ± 0.76) is greater than variation 2 (7.94 ± 0.95). The data was analyzed using analysis of variance ANOVA test and the calculated value is (0.014) which is less than the table value. Hence, there was no significant difference observed at 1% and 5% level of significance.
 

The mean score of laddu given by the panelists for color where variation 2 (8.63 ± 0.63) is greater than variation 1 (8.41 ± 0.64). The flavor of variation 2 (8.63 ± 0.60) was greater than variation 1 (8.27 ± 0.78). The texture of variation 2 (8.59 ± 0.73) was greater than variation 1 (8.33 ± 0.71). The taste of variation 2 (8.65 ± 0.63) was greater than variation 1 (8.31 ± 0.79). The overall acceptability of variation 2 (8.75 ± 0.52) was greater than variation 1 (8.33 ± 0.65). The data was analyzed using analysis of variance ANOVA test and the calculated value is (10.9) which is more than the table value. Hence, there was significant difference observed at 1% and 5% level of significance. The mean score of panjeri given by the panelists for color of variation 2 (8.47 ± 0.83) was greater than variation 1 (8.33 ± 0.79). The flavor of variation 2 (8.22 ± 0.90) was greater than variation 1 (8.04 ± 1.00). The texture of variation 2 (8.35 ± 0.89) was greater than variation 1 (8.20 ± 0.87). The taste of variation 2 (8.33 ± 0.86) was greater than variation 1 (8.08 ± 1.00). The overall acceptability of variation 2 (8.37 ± 0.85) was greater than variation 1 (8.16 ± 0.83). The data was analyzed using analysis of variance ANOVA test and the calculated value is (0.03) which is less than the table value. Hence, there was no significant difference observed at 1% and 5% level of significance.
 

4. Conclusion

It was concluded that all the products that were developed were calculated for energy, protein, fat, carbohydrate, iron and calcium. Consumption of these nutrient dense products will not only improve the nutritional status of the population, but also sustain the production of minor millets, which are on the extinct, ultimately leading to a more holistic approach in sustaining precious agro bio-diversity. It’s promising nutritional facts gives warranty for further studies to increase the dietary use of these food products. Hence, a bright future is envisaged for use of Foxtail millet in convenience foods, particularly traditional convenience mixes to meet the challenges of the modern dynamic food industry.
 

References

  1. Ray KS and Athawale MP. Index of nutritional quality (INQ) of some selected Indian snacks. The Indian Journal of Nutrition and Dietetics 38 (2001): 114-118.
  2. Arya SS. Convenience Foods-Emerging Scenario. Indian Food Industry 11 (1992): 31-41.
  3. Thiam AA and Ndoye A. Bread from millet. League for International Food Education Newsletter (1977).
  4. Joshi HC, Singh G, Agarwal P, et al. Effect of incorporation of Foxtail millet (Setaria italica) on the quality of cake. Souvenir, 5th International Food Convention, Innovative Food Technologies and quality systems, strategies for global competitiveness (2003): 99-100.
  5. Aruna K. Nutrient content and acceptability of selected recipes made with Italian millet. Journal of Research APAU 17 (1989): 28-32.
  6. Hima Bindu N and Sumathi S. Organoleptic evaluation and nutrient composition of Foxtail millet products. Souvenir, 5th International Food Convention, Innovative Food Technologies and quality systems, strategies for global competitiveness (2003): 121.
  7. Gahlawat P and Sehgal S. Protein quality of weaning foods based on locally available cereal and pulse combination. Plant foods for human nutrition 46 (1994): 245-253.
  8. Thathola A and Srivastava S. Physico-chemical properties and nutritional traits of millet-based weaning food suitable for infants of the Kumaon hills, Northern India. Asia Pacific Journal of Clinical Nutrition 11 (2002): 28-32.
  9. Ushakumari SR, Shrikantan Latha and Malleshi NG. The functional properties of popped, flaked, extruded and roller-dried Foxtail millet (Setaria italica). International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 39 (2004): 907-915.
  10. Sowbhagya CM and Ali SZ. A process for manufacturing high fibre, low fat vermicelli noodles from millets. Indian Patent 1128/DEL/99 (1999).
  11. Hulse JH, Laing EM and Pearson OE. Sorghum and the millets: theirmcomposition and nutritive value. Academic press, London (1980).
  12. Malleshi NG and Desikachar HSR. nutritive value of malted millet flours, qual plant plant foods Hum nutr. 36 (1986): 191-196.
     

Citation: Zainab Fatima and Avanti Rao. Development, Organoleptic Evaluation and Acceptability of Products Developed by Incorporating Foxtail Millet. Journal of Food Science and Nutrition Research 2 (2019): 128-135.

  • 13
    Editorial Board
  • 8
    Citations
  • 21
    Total Articles
  • 986
    Likes

    Editor In Chief

    Dr. Dario Siniscalco

  • Department of Experimental Medicine
    University of Campania-Luigi Vanvitelli
    Naples, Italy

© 2016-2019, Copyrights Fortune. All Rights Reserved