Track your Manuscript
Enter Correct Manuscript Reference Number:
Get Details
Why Us
Open Access
Peer-reviewed
Rapid publication
Lifetime hosting
Free indexing service
Free promotion service
More citations
Search engine friendly
Go Back       International Academic Journal of Nutrition & Food Sciences | IAR J Nut Fd. Sci , 2(2) | Volume:2 Issue:2 ( March 30, 2021 ) : 1-7
144 Downloads202 Views

DOI : 10.47310/iarjnfs2021.v02i02.006       Download PDF       HTML       XML

Quality Characteristics of Biscuits Produced From a Blend Of White Yam (Dioscorea Rotundata) And Wheat (Triticum Aestivum) Flour


Article History

Received: 08.03.2021 Revision: 13.03.2021 Accepted: 24.03.2021 Published: 30.03.2021


Author Details

Georgina Dadson1, Nanice Fosu2 & Herberta Prebie3


Authors Affiliations

1Department of Hospitality and Catering Management, Takoradi Technical Institute, Ghana


2Voc/Tech Department, St. Ambrose College of Education, P.O.Box 25, Wamfie, B/A- Ghana


3Home Economics Department, Diabene Senior High School, P.O.Box 35, Ketan-Takoradi, Ghana


Abstract: The study sought to produce a fortified biscuit from wheat and yam flour blends in a ratio: 100:0, 70:30 and 60:40. Three biscuit samples were produced and coded as T1 (100% wheat flour), T2 (70% wheat flour and 30% yam flour) and T3 (60% wheat flour and 40% yam flour) respectively. Proximate composition results of the various biscuit samples produced indicated an increasing level of moisture, 2.37±0.10 to 3.16±1.09, Ash 2.61±0.03 to 3.58±0.005, fat 8.36±0.34 to 21.21±0.15, protein 7.24±0.74 to 16.08±1.26 and carbohydrate 60.80±0.39 to 77.94±0.299. The sensory properties of the biscuits showed a significant (p<0.05) difference between all fortified samples and the control. Sample T2 (70% wheat flour and 30% yam flour) had the highest mean score of (6.70%) followed by sample T1 (100% wheat flour) with 5.40%. Among all the three biscuit samples produced, sample T2 was the most accepted biscuit by the panelists.


Keywords: Dioscorea Rotundata, Triticum Aestivum, composite flour, biscuits, consumer acceptability.


INTRODUCTION

Biscuits are convenience snack eaten by both children and adult of all ages in many nations (Adebowale et al., 2012). In biscuit production wheat is the principal cereal used due to its unique rheological residences presenting high quality effect on baking quality (Svec, & Hruskova, 2010). Variety of foods crafted from wheat and cereals are poor resources of protein and therefore may require partial replacement to enhance the nutritional value (Alobo, A. P. 2001). Supplementation of cereal based products with different protein sources including oil seeds and legumes has obtained maximum attention by bakers (Dhingra & Jood, 2002). This is due to the fact that oil seed and legumes are rich in proteins particularly vital amino acid that is limited in cereals. The use of composite flour has become popular of late due to its economic and nutritional advantages it offers to both growers and consumers (Neelam & Rajni, 2009). Biscuits are prepared from blend of different flours such as cereals and legume or root plants that is referred to as composite Flour. Blending different flours help to fulfill the unique functional characteristics and nutritional compositions in the prepared products (Ubbor & Akobundu, 2009).


White yam (Dioscorea rotundata) is a yam type extensively cultivated for meals purpose. The white yam is of excessive monetary importance and social-cultural value. Yam (Dioscorea spp), is a tuber crop, one of the primary staples of sub-Saharan Africa. It is a native crop of significance with brilliant dietary and medicinal value to mankind (Agbai, 1986; Pius chinwuba, et al., 2006). In Africa, yam is consumed as a sparkling vegetable through boiling, frying, roasting and grilling. Yam is relatively perishable because of its excessive moisture content (52.3–55.1%). For this reason, yam is processed into dry flour as a product with longer shelf life. Yam flour can be used to thicken soups and sauces as well as dumpling preparations (Ukpabi et al., 2008). The processing of yam to composite yam flour is a necessary preservative measure to save monetary loss to farmers and allows efficient utilization of this locally grown crop (Schultheis & Wilson, 1998).


The benefits of wheat and yam composite flours encompass nutritional advantage, the improvement of food and better product qualities (Noor Aziah & Komathi, 2009). The concept of wheat and yam composite flour is technically possible and economically suitable. The substitution of yam flour to supplement wheat for biscuit, bread and pastry preparation represents an exciting alternative for manufacturers and consumers. As of late, researchers have moved a lot of interest in the advancement of food items particularly pastry products or food made with flour using composite flours. Composite flours are blend of flours from tubers (eg cassava, sweet potato, yams) wealthy in starch and pulses (soy, peanut, Bambara nuts) as well as cereals (maize, rice, millet), these flours are rich in protein with or without wheat (Alobo, 2001).

Composite flour is economically applicable to developing nations as it lessens foreign exchange and promotes better supply of nutrients to the body and a better overall use of domestic agriculture production (Dhingra & Jood, 2002; Neelam & Rajni, 2009). The idea of wheat-yam composite flour is actually attainable and financially attractive. The replacement of yam flour to supplement wheat for biscuit making addresses an alternative option for producers and consumers. The aim of the study was to produce an acceptable biscuits from a blend of wheat and yam flour.


MATERIALS AND METHODS

Source of Raw Materials

Yam and Wheat flour were obtained from the Tafo Market in the Kumasi Metropolis. Other ingredients such as wheat flour, butter, baking powder, sugar, and milk was obtained from Buokrom Estate market, Kumasi.


Sample preparation

Yam Flour

Yam flour was prepared using the modified method from (Dziedzoave, et al., 2006). The process of preparation was done in 12 hours. The tubers were peeled, washed thoroughly to remove dirt and then grated. The grated yam mash was placed in a clean white calico cloth and was vigorously pressed with the hand to remove additional water until the yam was flaky. The pressed mash was spread on a cleaned baking tray and placed in hot oven at 60oC. Dried yam mash was milled to produce flour and sifted to remove fibrous materials and lumps. Flour was packaged in an airtight container and stored for biscuit production.


Experimental design

Three biscuit samples were formulated using the ratio, 100:0, 70: 30 and 60:40. The three mixture components in this study were 100% wheat flour (T1), 70% wheat flour and 30% yam flour (T2) and 60% wheat flour and 40% yam flour (T3). The proportion of the sample flour was expressed as a fraction of the mixture and for each treatment combination giving the sum of the component proportion as 100.

Table 1: ingredients formulation

INGREDIENTS

T1

T2

T3

Wheat flour (g)

100

70

60

yam flour (g)

0

30

40

Margarine (g)

40

40

40

Salt (g)

Sugar (g)

40

40

40

Baking powder (g)

1

1

1

milk(ml)

50

50

50

T1 (100% wheat flour), T2 (70% wheat flour and 30% yam flour), T3 (60% wheat flour and 40% yam)


Preparation of biscuits

Biscuit was produced using the creaming method described by (Okaka, 1997). The basic ingredients used for biscuit production were flour (100g), fat (40g), sugar (40g), milk (50g), salt (1g) and baking powder (1g). The sugar and fat was creamed using mixing bowl and wooden a ladle to produce a creamy mixture before the flour and other dry ingredients were added. Afterwards, the mixture was systematically mixed to form hard consistent dough. The dough obtained wad then softly kneaded manually on a smooth clean work surface for about 3 minutes.


The dough was thinly rolled on a wooden board with rolling pin to uniform thickness (2 mm) and cut out with biscuit cutter to desired shapes of similar sizes. The cut out biscuit dough pieces were placed on a greased baking tray and baked in an oven at 200°C for 20 mins to produce biscuits. The biscuits was allowed to cool for 10 minutes and packed in polyethylene bags, sealed and kept at desired temperature for sensory evaluation and proximate analysis.


Proximate composition

The biscuit samples were assessed to determine their nutritional quality. The parameters determined according to standard methods (AOAC, 2012) were moisture content, ash, protein, fat and carbohydrates


Moisture content and total solids: Oven Drying Method

Five grams (5g) of the sample was transferred to the previously dried and weighed dish. The Dish was placed in an oven and thermostatically controlled at 105 degrees for 5 hours. Dish was removed and placed in a desiccator to cool to room temperature and weighed. It was then dried again for 30 minutes, cooled down again and weighed. Drying, cooling and weighing were repeated until a constant weight was reached. (Alternatively, sample could be dried in a thermostatically controlled oven for at least 8 hours where a constant weight would be achieved). The determinations were duplicated and the average found (AOAC, 2004).


Calculations

% Moisture (wt/wt) = wt2O in sample ×100

Wt of wet sample

% Moisture (wt/wt) = wt of wet sample-wtof dry sample ×100

Wt of wet sample

% Total solids (wt/wt) = wt of dried sample ×100

Wt of wet sample

Where wt= Weight of sample/spread


Ash content

5g sample was weighed into a tarred crucible and was pre-dried. Crucibles were placed in cool muffle furnace using tongs, gloves and protective eyewear. The crucibles Ignited for 2 hours at about 600 degrees Celsius. Muffle furnace was turned off and opened when temperature dropped to at least 250 degrees preferably lower. The door was carefully opened to avoid losing ash that may be fluffy. Safety tongs was used to transfer crucibles to a desiccator with a porcelain plate and desiccant. Desiccator was closed and allowed crucibles to cool prior to weighing.

Calculations


%Ash = wt of ash ×100

Wt of sample

%Ash = (wt of crucible+ ash) – wt of empty crucible ×100 (wt of crucible+ sample) – wt of empty crucible


Where

wt= Weight of sample/spread


Fat content: soxhlet extraction

Previously dried (air oven at 100°C) 250 ml round bottom flask was weighed accurately. 5.0g of dried sample to 22 ×80mm paper thimble or a folded filter paper was weighed. A small of cotton or glass wool was placed into the thimble to prevent loss of the sample. 150ml of petroleum spirit B.P 40-60°C was added to the round bottom flask and assembled the apparatus. A condenser was connected to the soxhlet extractor and reflux for 4 - 6 hours on the heating mantle. After extraction, thimble was removed and recovered solvent by distillation. The flask and fat/oil was heated in an oven at about 103°C to evaporate the solvent. The flask and contents were cooled to room temperature in a desiccator. The flask was weighed to determine weight of fat/oil collected.


% Fat (dry basis) = fat/oil collected × 100

Weight of sample


% Fat (dry basis) = (wt of flask + oil) – wt. of flask × 100

Weight of sample

Crude fibre determination

Two grams (2g) of the sample from crude fat determination was weighed into a 750ml Erlenmeyer flask. Two hundred milliliters (200ml) of 1.25% H2SO4 was added and immediately flask was set on hot plate and connected to the condenser. The contents were boiled within 1 minute of contact with solution. At the end of 30 minutes, flask was removed and immediately filtered through linen cloth in funnel and washed with a large volume of water. Filtrate (containing sample from acid hydrolysis) was washed and returned into the flask with 200ml 1.25% NaOH solutions. Flask was connected to the condenser and was boiled for exactly 30 minutes. It was then filtered through Fischer’s crucible and washed thoroughly with water and added 15ml 96% alcohol. Crucible and contents was dried for 2 hour at 105 °C and cooled in desiccator and it was weighed. Crucible was ignited in a furnace for 30 minutes and after that it was cooled and reweighed.


% Crude fibre = weight of crude fibre × 100

Weight of sample


% Crude fibre =

wt of crucible + sample (before – after) ashing × 100

Weight of sample


Where

wt= Weight of sample/spread


Protein Determination

Digestion Method

Two grams (2g) of sample and a half of selenium –based catalyst tablets and a few anti-bumping agents were added to the digestion flask. Twenty five milliliters (25ml) of concentrated H2SO4 was added and the flask was shaken for the entire sample to become thoroughly wet. Flask was placed on digestion burner and heated slowly until boiling ceased and the resulting solution was clear. The sample was then cooled to room temperature and digested sample solution was transferred into a 100ml volumetric flask and made up to the mark.


Distillation Method

To flush out the apparatus before use, distilled water was boiled in a steam generator of the distillation apparatus with the connections arranged to circulate through the condenser, for at least 10 minutes. The receiving flask was lowered and continued to heat for 30 seconds in order to carry over all liquid in the condenser. 25 ml of 2% boric acid was pipetted into 250ml conical flask and 2 drops of mixed indicator added. The conical flask and its contents were placed under the condenser in such a position that the tip of the condenser is completely immersed in solution. 10ml of the digested sample solution was measured into the decomposition flask of the Kejdahl unit, fixed it and add excess of 40% NaOH (about 15-20ml) to it. The ammonia produced was distilled into the collection flask with the condenser tip immersed in the receiving flask till a volume of about 150ml– 200ml is collected. Before distilling another sample and on completion of all distillations, the apparatus was flushed as in step 1 above. Steam was allowed to pass only until 5ml of the distillate is obtained.


Titration Method

The Distillate with 0.1N HCL solution was titrated. The acid was added until the solution became colourless. Any additional acid added made the two solutions become pink. The nitrogen content was determined in duplicate, and a blank determination was run using the same amount of all reagents as used for the sample. The blank was meant to correct for traces of nitrogen in the reagents and included digestion as well as distillation methods.


Calculation:

% Total nitrogen = 100 × (Va-Vb) × NA× 0.01401× 100

W× 10

Where:

Va- volume in ml of standard acid used in titration

Vb- volume in ml of standard acid used in blank

NA- normality of acid

W- Weight of sample taken


Carbohydrate content

The calculation of available carbohydrate (nitrogen-free extract-NFE) was made after completing the analysis for ash, crude fibre, ether extract and crude protein. The calculation was made by adding the percentage values on dry matter basis of these analysed contents and subtracting them from 100%.


Calculation:

Carbohydrate (%) = % crude fibre + % NFE

OR

Carbohydrate (%) =100 - (% moisture +% fat +% protein +% ash)

ӿ. Calculation for dry basis = (100-% moisture) × wet basis

100

Sensory Analysis

The sensory evaluation was done on three different samples: Sample T1, T2, and T3. Fifty (50) consumers were randomly selected for the sensory. Consumers’ were asked to evaluate the three coded samples on a 9-point hedonic scale with 1= like extremely, 2= like very much 3= like moderate, 4=like slightly, 5= Neither like nor dislike 6=dislike slightly, 7=dislike moderately, 8=dislike very much, 9=dislike extremely very much in an experiment for sensory evaluation on the parameters (colour, texture, aroma, taste and overall acceptability).


Statistical Analysis

Data were subjected to Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Tukey Test was used to determine the significant difference among the various samples in duplicates. Data were analyzed using the software, Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22.00 (SPSS inc., Chicago), IL, USA at the 0.05 level of significance.


Results and Discussion

Table 2 presents the proximate composition of biscuit samples. The varied chemical composition of combined flour upsets the nutritional quality of the product. The moisture content of the biscuits ranges from 2.37-3.16%. The low moisture content is within standard edge in terms of food storage as commended by (USDA, 2017) which stated that a moisture content between 13-15% helps to prolong the keeping quality of the product. The higher moisture content in the T1 (control) may be credited to the wet nature of the biscuit as this serves as a medium to microbial spoilage. There was a significant different (p<0.05) between sample T1 (100% wheat flour) and T3 (60% wheat flour and 40% yam flour) but no significant difference between control (100% wheat flour) and sample T2 (70% wheat flour and 30% yam flour).


Ash content of the biscuit samples ranges from 2.61 – 3.58% with sample T3 (60% wheat flour and 40% yam flour) recorded the highest ash content and the least ash content was T2 (70% wheat flour and 30% yam flour). There was no significant difference (p<0.05) between T1 (100% wheat flour) and T3 (60% wheat flour and 40% yam flour).


The results indicated higher levels of ash with increasing substitution of yam flour. Ash content of the composite blend increased due to the significantly higher mineral content of all the non-wheat flours. These results are in agreement with those obtained by (Malunga et al., 2017). High ash content has been ascribed to high minerals which could increase the mineral content of the consumers and are good for the bones as reported by (Sharma & Chauhan, 2000). Fat content of the biscuits differs from 8.36 to 21.21%. The fat content increased as the 30% of yam flour was mixed with 70% wheat flour. Fat content in T1 (100% wheat flour) biscuit sample was 8.36% whilst sampleT3 (60% wheat flour and 40% yam flour) recorded high fat content of 21.21%. Control (100% wheat biscuit) differed significantly (p<0.05) with the samples. High values of crude fat content agree with the findings of (Ayo & Okoliko, 2003).

The crude protein content ranges from 7.28-16.08%. Biscuit samples (T1) produced with 100% wheat flour (control) had protein content of 7.24%. Sample (T2) produced with (70% wheat flour and 30% yam flour) recorded a protein content of 12.52%, while samples (T3) produced with 60% wheat flour and 40% yam flour had 16.08% protein. The increase was attributed to the level of substitution of wheat flour with yam flour (Nilufer, 2008). Observed that the protein quality of both the cassava-soya and the cassava-groundnut breads is higher than that of common wheat bread. The carbohydrate contents of composite biscuits were influenced by the level of cassava flour supplementation and the highest (67.94 %) content was found in 100 % cassava flour sample compared to 100% wheat biscuit (63.24%).


The carbohydrate content ranged from 60.80-77.94%. sample (T1) produced with 100% wheat flour (control) recorded carbohydrate content of 77.94% whilst sample (T2) produced with (70% wheat flour and 30% yam flour) had 60.80% carbohydrate content and samples (T3) produced with 60% wheat flour and 40% yam also had carbohydrate content of 63.97%. The carbohydrate content decreased significantly (p < 0.05) as the yam flour was incorporated into the wheat flour with varied proportions. This result disagree with that of (Codex Alimentarius Commission, 1994) who said that The relatively low carbohydrate values in the composite flour products may be attributed to the lower levels of wheat flour used relative to the control. However all samples were found to be significantly (p<0.05) different from the control (63.24%).


Table 2: Proximate composition of biscuit samples

Samples

Moisture %

Ash%

Fat%

Protein%

Carbohydrate%

T1

3.16±1.09

3.38±0.30

8.36±0.34

7.24±0.74

77.94±0.299

T2

2.83±0.58

2.61±0.03

21.21±0.15

12.52±1.11

60.80±0.39

T3

2.37±0.10

3.58±0.005

13.97±0.65

16.08±1.26

63.97±1.81

T1 (100% wheat flour), T2 (70% wheat flour and 30% yam flour), T3 (60% wheat flour and 40% yam flour)


SENSORY ANALYSIS OF THE BISCUITS

Table 3 displays the results of sensory scores for the biscuits produced from different levels of composite flours and the control. Colour plays a key role in determining consumer acceptance of foods. The score rated for the control is significantly (p<0.05) higher than other samples. The low rating of colour in other samples could be attributed to darker colour and brownish of the biscuits as replacement of wheat flour with yam flour increases. Browning in biscuit could be as a result of maillard reaction and caramelization of starch and sugar during biscuit processing (Dhingra & Jood, 2002). Also, (Sharma & Chauhan, 2000) had testified a decrease in colour score of composite flour baked products as replacement increased. The scores for texture recorded a significant difference (p<0.05) between sample T2 (70% wheat flour and 30% yam flour) and control T1 (100% wheat flour).


Texture describes softness and chewiness of composite biscuits. It was observed that substituting yam flour with wheat flour in the proportion of 30% and 40% resulted in the hard texture of the biscuits comparative to the control (Sabanis, D., & Tzia, C. 2009). The aroma of the biscuit products ranged from 5.60±0.80 to 7.01±0.10. The composite biscuit sample T2 (70% wheat flour and 30% yam flour) had the highest mean score of7. 01% followed by sample T3 (60% wheat flour and 40% yam) with a mean score of6.10% and Sample T1 ((100% wheat flour) had the lowest mean score rating 5.60%. It was observed from the result that there was a significant (p>0.05) between the composite samples and the control as 30% and 40% yam flour was incorporated.


Taste is the main sensory characteristic which affects the sensitivity of food to be consumed. Panelists scored sample T2 (70% wheat flour and 30% yam flour) high followed by sample T1 (100% wheat flour). Conversely, there was significant difference (p<0.05) between the control and other composite samples for taste. The low score ratings observed in samples T3 may be due to addition of high percentage of yam flour to wheat flour. The study revealed that biscuit sample T2 (70% wheat flour and 30% yam flour) was rated “like extremely” this means that sample T2 produced was rated highest among all attributes and was significantly (p<0.05) different from the control wheat sample.


Table 3: The sensory analysis of the biscuit

Samples

Colour

Texture

Aroma

Taste

Level of acceptability

T1

7.23±0.90

5.10±0.90

5.60±0.80

5.50±0.70

5.40±0.70

T2

6.40±0.80

6.40±0.80

7.01±0.10

6.20±0.60

6.70±0.90

T3

5.50±0.75

6.90±0.70

6.10±0.80

5.00±0.90

5.10±0.60

LSD

0.23

0.342

0.021

1.481

0.061

T1 (100% wheat flour), T2 (70% wheat flour and 30% yam flour), T3 (60% wheat flour and 40% yam)


CONCLUSION

The study has shown the possibility of using wheat and yam flour for the production of biscuit with required sensory properties and significant nutrient value. The replacement of wheat with 30% and 40% yam flour resulted in superior proximate and sensory attributes. This means that biscuit can be produced using yam flour up to 30% without an adverse effect on the nutritional and sensory attributes.


REFERENCES

  1. Adebowale, A. A., Adegoke, M. T., Sanni, S. A., Adegunwa, M. O., & Fetuga, G. O. (2012). Functional properties and biscuit making potentials of sorghum-wheat flour composite. American Journal of food technology7(6), 372-379.

  2. Agbai, O. (1986). Anti-sickling effect of dietary thiocyanate in prophylactic control of sickle cell anemia. Journal of the National Medical Association 78(11), 1053-1056.

  3. Alobo, A. P. (2001). Effect of sesame seed flour on millet biscuit characteristics. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition56(2), 195-202.

  4. AOAC. (2004). Official Methods of Analysis: Association of Official Analytical Chemist 18 th ed. Washington, D.C.

  5. AOAC. (2012). Official methods of analysis of AOAC International, 19th Ed., Gaithersburg, M.D USA

  6. Ayo, J.A., & Okoliko, A. (2003). “Effect of SprayDrying Temperature of Egg White Powder on the Qualityof Meringue.” Journal of Arid Agriculture. 13, 1817.

  7. Codex Alimentarius Commission. (1994). Codex standard for processed cereal based foods for infants and children Codex standard 74 – 198 (amended 1987, 91, 98) Vol 4 Codex Alimentarius commission/FAO/WHO Rome, Italy,

  8. Dhingra, S., & Jood, S. (2002). Organoleptic and nutritional evaluation of wheat breads supplemented with soybean and barley flour. Food chemistry77(4), 479-488.

  9. Dziedzoave, N.T., Abass, A.B., Amoa, N.K.A., & Sablah, M. (2006). Quality management manual for production of high quality cassava and yam flour. (Adegoke, G.O. and Brimer, L. Eds.). International Institute of tropical Agriculture (IITA), 9, Xii +68pp.

  10. Malunga, L.N., Izydorczyk, M., & Beta, T. (2017). Effect of water extractable arabinoxylans from wheat aleurone and branon lipid peroxidation and factors influencing their antioxidant capacity. Bioact. Carbohydr. Dietary Fibre.; 10, 20-26.

  11. Neelam, K., & Rajni, G. (2009). Effect of composite flour fortification to wheat flour on the quality characteristics of unleavened bread. British Food J, 11(6), 554-564.

  12. Nilufer, D., (2008). Boyacioglu D, Vodovotz Y. Functionality of soymilk powder and its components in fresh soy bread. J. Food Sci. 73, 275–281.

  13. Noor Aziah, A.A., & Komathi, C.A. (2009). Acceptability attributes of crackers made from different types of composite flour. International Food Research Journal.; 16, 479-482.

  14. Okaka, J.C. (1997). Biscuit manufacture in cereals and legumes storage and processing technology. Data andMicrosystems Publishers Ltd Enugu, 115-130.

  15. Pius chinwuba, I., & Odjuvwuederhie emmanuel, I. (2006). Determinants of yam production and economic efficiency among small-holder farmers in southeastern. Nigeria Journal of Central European Agriculture 7, 337-342.

  16. Sabanis, D., & Tzia, C. (2009). Effect of rice, corn and soy flour addition on characteristic of bread produced from different wheat cultivars. Food Bioprocess Technol.; 2, 68-79.

  17. Schultheis, J. R., & Wilson, L. G. (1998). What is the difference between a sweet potato and a yam. Resources catalog, North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service: Comparing several characteristics of sweet potatoes and yams. https://content.ces.ncsu.edu/what-is-the-difference-between-a-sweetpotato-and-a-yam.

  18. Sharma, H.R., & Chauhan, G.S. (2000). Physical, sensory and chemical characteristics of wheat breads supplemented with fenugreek. J. Food Sci. Technol. 37, 91-94.

  19. Švec, I., & Hrušková, M. (2010). Evaluation of wheat bread features. Journal of food engineering99(4), 505-510.

  20. Ubbor, S.C., & Akobundu, E.N.T. (2009). Quality Characteristics of Cookies from Composite Flours of Watermelon Seed, Cassava and Wheat. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition. 8 (7), 1097-1102.

  21. Ukpabi, U., Omodamiro, R., Ikeorgu, J., & Asiedu, R. (2008). Sensory evaluation of amala from improved water yam (Dioscorea alata) genotypes in Nigeria. African Journal of Biotechnology 7(8), 1134-1138.

  22. USDA (2017). “US-Nigeria Commodity Storage Workshop VII-I on Stored grain Management in On-farm Storage and Warehouse Structures.” International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Ibadan.

About IAR Journals
International Academic & Research Consortium is a Scientific Research Consortium under the banner of IARCON Knowledge Hub Private Limited, with the main aim to promote the development and strengthening of the interfaces between various ..
View More
Copyright © 2020 International Acedemic Research Journals. All Rights Reserved.
Designed & Developed by