Abstract
The study was aimed to develop baked and extruded functional foods from Metabolic Syndrome (MS) specific designed ingredient mixes with optimum amino acid makeup using key food ingredients with functional properties such as whole cereals, legumes, skimmed milk powder, along with flaxseeds and fenugreek seeds. Two cereals viz. barley and oats and four pulses viz. mung bean, cowpea, bengal gram and soybean were blended in different proportions in order to balance the limiting amino acid lysine in the wheat flour. Three products namely bread, extruded snack and noodles prepared from twenty five ingredient mixes. Six ingredient mixes of breads and four ingredient mixes each of extruded snack and noodles specifically designed for MS patients were organoleptically at par with control wheat flour products. The acceptable products had significantly (p ≤ 0.05) higher lysine, crude protein, ash and fibre and low carbohydrates in compare control whole wheat flour products, hence appropriate for MS patients.
Keywords: Metabolic syndrome, Lysine, Functional food, Bread, Extruded snack, Noodles
Introduction
Metabolic syndrome (MS) is a complex web of metabolic factors that are associated with a 2-fold risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and a 5-fold risk of diabetes. Individuals with MS have a 30–40 % probability of developing diabetes and/or CVD within 20 years, depending on the number of components present (Enas et al. 2007). Basically, the risk factors for metabolic syndrome are insulin resistance and abdominal obesity (Park et al. 2003). Recently, it has been noticed that an Asian Indian phenotype has high body fat with relatively less body mass index, less lean body mass and marked abdominal obesity owing to the amino acid imbalance. In this context, new evidence reveals an increasingly complex role for protein and amino acids in regulation of body composition, glucose homeostasis, cell signalling, and satiety (Donald et al. 2008; Millward et al. 2008). Well nourished Indians showed a trend toward improved muscle function with higher lysine intakes. There are several lines of reasoning to suggest that lysine intake may influence muscle function (Kurpad et al. 2002).
Cereal-based diet is typical in India and the traditional vegetarian Indian meals usually include foods from different sources in order to improve their protein quality (Vaidya and Sheth 2011). The concern for optimum protein quality to prevent metabolic abnormalities holds significance for a large lacto vegetarian population of India which depends on plant foods for obtaining essential amino acids (Singh 2008). Optimum protein quality from meals along with physically active lifestyle may help the people to have right proportion of fat mass and lean mass which may have protective role against MS. With the growing epidemic of obesity and the MS, reduction in the consumption of refined carbohydrates and sugar, replaced by either minimally processed whole grain products and healthy sources of fats and protein, should become a major public health priority, together with regular physical activity and weight maintenance. The aim of the study was to formulate the MS specific ingredient mix with optimum amino acid make up using key food ingredients with reported functional properties. The nutritionally superior and organoleptically acceptable baked and extruded products developed from such ingredient mixes may help to reverse the features of MS.
Materials and methods
Procurement of food ingredients
For preparation of ingredient mixes, three cereals viz. whole wheat, barley and oats; four pulses viz. Mung bean, cowpea, bengal gram and soybean; skimmed milk powder, fenugreek seeds and flax seeds were procured in one lot from the local market and stored in air tight containers.
Designing of ingredient mixes
In order to balance the limiting amino acid lysine in the wheat flour, 25 ingredient mixes were designed by correcting the chemical score as recommended by FAO/WHO/UNU (1985) using food composition tables of ICMR (2010). These ingredient mixes were designed using foods with reported functional properties such as whole cereals and pulses were chosen for their soluble fiber and protein content, flaxseeds are rich source of omega-3 fatty acids and fenugreek seeds contain trigonelline alkaloids that help reducing blood glucose levels. The ingredients were used in proportions so as to reach the chemical score of 100. The lysine content of the foods was used to calculate the chemical score. The formulations of each ingredient mix used to prepare an individual product are shown in Table 1.
Table 1.
Formulations of Metabolic Syndrome (MS) specific Ingredient mixes
| Ingredient mixes | Flour omposition | Amount of key ingredients (per 100 g) |
|---|---|---|
| Control | WW | 100 |
| 1 | WW+Mb+Fl+Fn | 63 + 27 + 5 + 5 |
| 2 | WW+Bar+Mb+Fl+Fn | 49 + 16 + 25 + 5 + 5 |
| 3 | WW+Bar+M+Fl+Fn | 33 + 33 + 24 + 5 + 5 |
| 4 | WW+Ot+Mb+Fl+Fn | 49 + 16 + 25 + 5 + 5 |
| 5 | WW+Ot+Mb+Fl+Fn | 33 + 33 + 24 + 5 + 5 |
| 6 | WW+Cp+Fl+Fn | 62 + 28 + 5 + 5 |
| 7 | WW+Bar+Cp+Fl+Fn | 48 + 16 + 26 + 5 + 5 |
| 8 | WW+Bar+Cp+Fl+Fn | 33 + 33 + 24 + 5 + 5 |
| 9 | WW+Ot+Cp+Fl+Fn | 48 + 16 + 26 + 5 + 5 |
| 10 | WW+Ot+Cp+Fl+Fn | 33 + 33 + 24 + 5 + 5 |
| 11 | WW+Bg+Fl+Fn | 66 + 24 + 5 + 5 |
| 12 | WW+Bar+Bg+Fl+Fn | 50 + 17 + 23 + 5 + 5 |
| 13 | WW+Bar+Bg+Fl+Fn | 34 + 34 + 22 + 5 + 5 |
| 14 | WW+Ot+Bg+Fl+Fn | 50 + 17 + 23 + 5 + 5 |
| 15 | WW+Ot+Bg+Fl+Fn | 34 + 34 + 22 + 5 + 5 |
| 16 | WW+Sb+Fl+Fn | 60 + 30 + 5 + 5 |
| 17 | WW+Bar+Sb+Fl+Fn | 47 + 16 + 27 + 5 + 5 |
| 18 | WW+Bar+Sb+Fl+Fn | 32 + 32 + 26 + 5 + 5 |
| 19 | WW+Ot+Sb+Fl+Fn | 47 + 16 + 27 + 5 + 5 |
| 20 | WW+Ot+S+Fl+Fn | 32 + 32 + 26 + 5 + 5 |
| 21 | WW+SM+Fl+Fn | 65 + 25 + 5 + 5 |
| 22 | WW+Bar+SM+Fl+Fn | 50 + 16 + 24 + 5 + 5 |
| 23 | WW+Bar+SM+Fl+Fn | 34 + 34 + 22 + 5 + 5 |
| 24 | WW+Ot+SM+Fl+Fn | 50 + 16 + 24 + 5 + 5 |
| 25 | WW+Ot+SM+Fl+Fn | 34 + 34 + 22 + 5 + 5 |
Where, WW: whole wheat flour; Bar: barley flour; Ot: oat flour; Fl: flaxseeds; Fn: fenugreek seeds; Mb: mung bean; Cp: cowpea; Bg: Bengal gram; Sb: soybean and SM: skimmed milk powder
Development of functional foods
Functional foods namely Bread (Baked), Extruded snack and Noodles (Extruded products) were developed from whole wheat flour and all the twenty five designed ingredient mixes using cereals, legumes, skimmed milk powder, fenugreek seeds and flax seeds. Bread was prepared using straight dough AACC method numbered 10–11 (AACC 1984). Extruded snack were prepared using a co-rotating intermeshing twin screw extruder (Clextral, Firminy, France). Extrudates were dried and then packed in polythene bags. Noodle maker was used to extrude noodles from the dough by applying requisite amount of pressure and then oven dried at 50 °C for 3 h (Inglett et al. 2005). Three replications for product preparation were conducted.
Sensory evaluation of developed functional foods
The developed products were evaluated organoleptically thrice by a panel of ten semi trained panellists from the department of Food and Nutrition, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. The panellists were asked to score the samples on the basis of their color, appearance, texture, taste and overall acceptability by using a score card of 9 point Hedonic Rating Scale where 9 indicated “like extremely” and 1 indicated “dislike extremely”. Each panelist was provided with enough privacy to avoid biased assessment.
The highly acceptable products along with their corresponding control were weighed, homogenized and oven dried at 60 °C. Dried samples were stored in air tight plastic bags for nutritional analysis.
Nutritional analysis
All the samples were analyzed in triplicates. Moisture, ash, protein, crude fat and crude fibre content was evaluated on dry matter basis by AOAC (2000) method Carbohydrates were calculated by difference. In vitro protein digestibility was estimated by the method of Akeson and Stachman (1964)) modified by Singh et al. (1989). Available lysine was determined by FDNB method of Carpenter (1960) modified by Booth (1971).
Statistical analysis
Non parametric tests such as Tukey’s and Dunken tests were used for selecting the best formulations through sensory evaluation. Means and standard deviations for various parameters of proximate analysis were computed using MS Excel. The data were subjected to ANOVA using the statistical analysis software (SAS) with a probability of P ≤ 0.05.
Results and discussion
Sensory evaluation
Tables 2, 3 and 4 represent the organoleptic evaluation of baked and extruded products made up of 25 composite ingredient mixes whose formulations have been discussed earlier. Out of 25 samples, breads made of ingredient mix 2, 6, 7, 8, 11 and 16 was at par with the control (whole wheat flour bread), having overall acceptability scores between 7.8 to 8.0. Breads made from ingredient mix 2, 7, 8, 9 and 16 were most acceptable having score range of 7.8 to 8.4. Similarly, for colour and texture, ingredient mix 2, 7, 8, 11 and ingredient mix 7, 8 and 11 were found to be most acceptable. Ingredient mix 2, 6 and 7 were having comparable taste with the control. These findings are thus supportive of those reported in the literature on the use of different flours as partial substitution of wheat flour in bread making. Addition of soy flour or other cereal pulse blends improve the nutritional quality of bread (Wang et al. 2002; Pacheco-Delahaye and Testa 2005). Addition of fenugreek seeds upto 20 % increases the functional properties of the breads as reported by Gamalth and Ganesharanee (2009). Hence, fenugreek seeds can be safely added to food systems such as bakery, not only as a nutrient but also as a functional agent.
Table 2.
Sensory evaluation of developed breads
| Ingredient mixes | Flour Composition | Appearance | Colour | Texture | Taste | Overall acceptability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | WW | 8.90 ± 0.07 | 8.70 ± 0.08 | 8.90 ± 0.10 | 8.80 ± 0.06 | 8.80a |
| 1 | WW+Mb+Fl+Fn | 6.50 ± 0.71 | 6.60 ± 0.52 | 6.50 ± 0.85 | 6.10 ± 0.74 | 6.425def |
| 2 | WW+Bar+Mb+Fl+Fn | 7.80 ± 0.63 | 7.90 ± 0.32 | 7.90 ± 0.32 | 8.20 ± 0.63 | 7.950b |
| 3 | WW+Bar+Mb+Fl+Fn | 6.20 ± 0.42 | 6.70 ± 0.48 | 6.60 ± 0.52 | 6.60 ± 0.52 | 6.525de |
| 4 | WW+Ot+Mb+Fl+Fn | 6.60 ± 0.70 | 6.20 ± 1.03 | 6.70 ± 0.67 | 6.10 ± 0.74 | 6.400def |
| 5 | WW+Ot+Mb+Fl+Fn | 6.70 ± 0.48 | 6.40 ± 1.07 | 5.50 ± 1.43 | 5.10 ± 1.20 | 5.925g |
| 6 | WW+Cp+Fl+Fn | 7.70 ± 0.48 | 7.60 ± 0.52 | 7.80 ± 0.42 | 8.00 ± 0.03 | 7.775b |
| 7 | WW+Bar+Cp+Fl+Fn | 8.40 ± 0.52 | 7.90 ± 0.32 | 8.00 ± 0.47 | 8.50 ± 0.53 | 8.200b |
| 8 | WW+Bar+Cp+Fl+Fn | 7.90 ± 0.32 | 7.80 ± 0.42 | 8.00 ± 0.47 | 7.80 ± 0.42 | 7.875b |
| 9 | WW+Ot+Cp+Fl+Fn | 7.80 ± 0.42 | 7.70 ± 0.48 | 6.70 ± 1.16 | 6.80 ± 1.14 | 7.250c |
| 10 | WW+Ot+Cp+Fl+Fn | 6.50 ± 1.18 | 6.20 ± 0.92 | 5.90 ± 1.29 | 5.70 ± 1.06 | 6.075fg |
| 11 | WW+Bg+Fl+Fn | 7.60 ± 0.70 | 8.00 ± 0.94 | 8.00 ± 0.67 | 7.80 ± 0.63 | 7.850b |
| 12 | WW+Bar+Bg+Fl+Fn | 6.40 ± 1.17 | 7.10 ± 0.88 | 6.70 ± 0.67 | 4.50 ± 0.53 | 6.175defg |
| 13 | WW+Bar+Bg+Fl+Fn | 6.40 ± 0.52 | 6.90 ± 0.74 | 6.10 ± 0.74 | 5.9 ± 0.99 | 6.325defg |
| 14 | WW+Ot+Bg+Fl+Fn | 6.50 ± 0.53 | 6.60 ± 0.84 | 5.90 ± 0.57 | 5.80 ± 1.14 | 6.200defg |
| 15 | WW+Ot+Bg+Fl+Fn | 6.50 ± 0.71 | 6.80 ± 0.79 | 5.50 ± 0.71 | 5.57 ± 0.82 | 6.125efg |
| 16 | WW+Sb+Fl+Fn | 8.00 ± 0.67 | 7.90 ± 0.57 | 7.90 ± 0.32 | 7.70 ± 0.48 | 7.875b |
| 17 | WW+Bar+Sb+Fl+Fn | 6.70 ± 1.16 | 6.70 ± 0.95 | 6.60 ± 0.70 | 6.40 ± 0.70 | 6.600d |
| 18 | WW+Bar+Sb+Fl+Fn | 6.50 ± 1.18 | 6.40 ± 1.58 | 6.40 ± 1.65 | 6.80 ± 1.14 | 6.525de |
| 19 | WW+Ot+Sb+Fl+Fn | 6.50 ± 1.08 | 6.80 ± 1.03 | 5.90 ± 1.37 | 5.80 ± 1.14 | 6.250defg |
| 20 | WW+Ot+Sb+Fl+Fn | 6.90 ± 0.88 | 6.10 ± 1.21 | 5.90 ± 1.10 | 5.50 ± 1.08 | 6.100efg |
| 21 | WW+SM+Fl+Fn | 6.70 ± 1.06 | 6.00 ± 0.82 | 6.00 ± 1.05 | 5.60 ± 0.97 | 6.075fg |
| 22 | WW+Bar+SM+Fl+Fn | 6.50 ± 0.53 | 6.30 ± 0.82 | 6.50 ± 0.95 | 5.50 ± 0.53 | 6.150efg |
| 23 | WW+Bar+SM+Fl+Fn | 6.90 ± 1.10 | 6.40 ± 0.70 | 6.00 ± 0.67 | 5.10 ± 0.99 | 6.100efg |
| 24 | WW+Ot+SM+Fl+Fn | 6.80 ± 0.92 | 6.50 ± 0.53 | 5.90 ± 0.74 | 5.20 ± 1.03 | 6.100efg |
| 25 | WW+Ot+SM+Fl+Fn | 7.40 ± 0.52 | 6.30 ± 0.95 | 5.70 ± 1.25 | 5.10 ± 0.99 | 6.125efg |
Whole wheat: WW; Barley: Bar; Oats: Ot; Mungbean: Mb; Cowpea: Cp; Bengal gram: Bg; Soybean: Sb; Skimmed milk powder: SM; Flaxseeds: Fl; Fenugreek seeds: Fn) CD at 5 % = 0.436
Values are Mean ± SD a-g Means within each row with different superscripts are significantly (P < 0.05) different
Table 3.
Sensory evaluation of developed extruded snacks
| Ingredient mixes | Flour Composition | Appearance | Colour | Texture | Taste | Overall acceptability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | WW | 8.40 ± 0.07 | 8.50 ± 0.08 | 8.40 ± 0.10 | 8.50 ± 0.06 | 8.45a |
| 1 | WW+Mb+Fl+Fn | 6.50 ± 0.71 | 6.60 ± 0.52 | 6.10 ± 0.85 | 6.42 ± 0.74 | 6.425cdefg |
| 2 | WW+Bar+Mb+Fl+Fn | 7.80 ± 0.63 | 7.90 ± 0.32 | 7.90 ± 0.32 | 8.20 ± 0.63 | 7.950b |
| 3 | WW+Bar+Mb+Fl+Fn | 6.20 ± 0.42 | 6.70 ± 0.48 | 6.60 ± 0.52 | 6.60 ± 0.18 | 6.525cdef |
| 4 | WW+Ot+Mb+Fl+Fn | 6.60 ± 0.70 | 6.20 ± 1.03 | 6.70 ± 0.67 | 6.10 ± 0.74 | 6.400cdefg |
| 5 | WW+Ot+Mb+Fl+Fn | 6.70 ± 0.48 | 6.40 ± 1.07 | 5.50 ± 1.43 | 5.10 ± 1.20 | 5.925h |
| 6 | WW+Cp+Fl+Fn | 7.70 ± 0.48 | 6.30 ± 0.48 | 6.30 ± 0.67 | 6.40 ± 0.84 | 6.675c |
| 7 | WW+Bar+Cp+Fl+Fn | 6.70 ± 1.16 | 6.70 ± 0.95 | 6.50 ± 0.53 | 5.40 ± 0.52 | 6.325cdefgh |
| 8 | WW+Bar+Cp+Fl+Fn | 7.30 ± 0.48 | 7.70 ± 0.48 | 7.00 ± 1.05 | 4.70 ± 0.48 | 6.675c |
| 9 | WW+Ot+Cp+Fl+Fn | 7.00 ± 0.12 | 6.60 ± 1.07 | 6.70 ± 1.16 | 5.90 ± 0.57 | 6.550cde |
| 10 | WW+Ot+Cp+Fl+Fn | 6.50 ± 1.18 | 6.20 ± 0.92 | 5.90 ± 1.29 | 5.70 ± 1.06 | 6.075gh |
| 11 | WW+Bg+Fl+Fn | 8.30 ± 0.48 | 8.30 ± 0.67 | 8.60 ± 0.52 | 8.20 ± 0.42 | 8.350b |
| 12 | WW+Bar+Bg+Fl+Fn | 6.40 ± 1.17 | 7.10 ± 0.88 | 6.70 ± 0.67 | 4.50 ± 0.53 | 6.175defgh |
| 13 | WW+Bar+Bg+Fl+Fn | 8.00 ± 0.11 | 8.20 ± 0.42 | 8.90 ± 0.32 | 8.00 ± 0.11 | 8.275b |
| 14 | WW+Ot+Bg+Fl+Fn | 6.50 ± 0.53 | 6.60 ± 0.84 | 5.90 ± 0.57 | 5.80 ± 1.14 | 6.200defgh |
| 15 | WW+Ot+Bg+Fl+Fn | 6.50 ± 0.71 | 6.80 ± 0.79 | 5.50 ± 0.71 | 5.70 ± 0.82 | 6.125efgh |
| 16 | WW+Sb+Fl+Fn | 8.00 ± 0.67 | 6.30 ± 0.67 | 5.70 ± 0.67 | 6.00 ± 0.47 | 6.500cdefg |
| 17 | WW+Bar+Sb+Fl+Fn | 6.70 ± 1.16 | 6.70 ± 0.95 | 6.60 ± 0.70 | 6.40 ± 0.70 | 6.600cd |
| 18 | WW+Bar+Sb+Fl+Fn | 6.50 ± 1.18 | 6.40 ± 1.58 | 6.40 ± 1.65 | 6.80 ± 1.14 | 6.525cdef |
| 19 | WW+Ot+Sb+Fl+Fn | 6.50 ± 1.08 | 6.80 ± 1.03 | 5.90 ± 1.37 | 5.80 ± 1.14 | 6.250cdefgh |
| 20 | WW+Ot+Sb+Fl+Fn | 6.90 ± 0.88 | 6.10 ± 1.29 | 5.90 ± 1.10 | 5.50 ± 1.08 | 6.100fgh |
| 21 | WW+SM+Fl+Fn | 6.70 ± 1.06 | 6.00 ± 0.82 | 6.00 ± 1.05 | 5.60 ± 0.97 | 6.075gh |
| 22 | WW+Bar+SM+Fl+Fn | 8.00 ± 0.11 | 7.70 ± 0.67 | 8.5 ± 0.53 | 8.30 ± 0.48 | 8.125b |
| 23 | WW+Bar+SM+Fl+Fn | 6.90 ± 1.10 | 6.40 ± 0.70 | 6.00 ± 0.67 | 5.10 ± 0.99 | 6.100fgh |
| 24 | W +Ot+SM+Fl+Fn | 6.80 ± 0.92 | 6.50 ± 0.53 | 5.90 ± 0.74 | 5.20 ± 1.03 | 6.100fgh |
| 25 | WW+Ot+SM+Fl+Fn | 7.40 ± 0.52 | 6.30 ± 0.95 | 5.70 ± 1.25 | 5.10 ± 0.99 | 6.125efgh |
Whole wheat: WW; Barley: Bar; Oats: Ot; Mungbean: Mb; Cowpea: Cp; Bengal gram: Bg; Soybean: Sb; Skimmed milk powder: SM; Flaxseeds: Fl; Fenugreek seeds: Fn) Values are Mean SD CD at 5 % = 0.438a-h Means within each row with different superscripts are significantly (P < 0.05) different
Table 4.
Sensory evaluation of developed noodles
| Ingredient mixes | Flour Composition | Appearance | Colour | Texture | Taste | Overall acceptability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | WW | 8.60 ± 0.07 | 8.70 ± 0.08 | 8.60 ± 0.10 | 8.70 ± 0.06 | 8.65a |
| 1 | WW+Mb+Fl+Fn | 4.70 ± 0.62 | 4.20 ± 0.60 | 6.70 ± 0.50 | 7.20 ± 0.68 | 5.725fg |
| 2 | WW+Bar+Mb+Fl+Fn | 7.10 ± 0.30 | 6.60 ± 0.38 | 8.10 ± 0.20 | 8.00 ± 0.38 | 8.150bc |
| 3 | WW+Bar+Mb+Fl+Fn | 3.60 ± 0.40 | 3.10 ± 0.41 | 5.60 ± 0.43 | 6.10 ± 0.42 | 4.600kl |
| 4 | WW+Ot+Mb+Fl+Fn | 3.60 ± 0.47 | 3.10 ± 0.46 | 5.60 ± 0.43 | 6.10 ± 0.43 | 4.600kl |
| 5 | WW+Ot+Mb+Fl+Fn | 3.40 ± 0.35 | 2.90 ± 0.30 | 5.40 ± 0.35 | 5.90 ± 0.20 | 4.450l |
| 6 | WW+Cp+Fl+Fn | 3.50 ± 0.41 | 3.00 ± 0.40 | 5.50 ± 0.45 | 6.00 ± 0.44 | 4.575kl |
| 7 | WW+Bar+Cp+Fl+Fn | 7.30 ± 0.30 | 6.80 ± 0.33 | 7.90 ± 0.33 | 7.80 ± 0.39 | 8.300bc |
| 8 | WW+Bar+Cp+Fl+Fn | 4.10 ± 0.73 | 3.60 ± 0.70 | 6.10 ± 0.75 | 6.60 ± 0.74 | 5.150hij |
| 9 | WW+\Ot+Cp+Fl+Fn | 4.00 ± 0.76 | 3.50 ± 0.66 | 6.00 ± 0.71 | 6.50 ± 0.56 | 5.075hijk |
| 10 | WW+Ot+Cp+Fl+Fn | 4.10 ± 0.85 | 3.60 ± 0.75 | 6.10 ± 0.85 | 6.60 ± 0.55 | 5.125hij |
| 11 | WW+Bg+Fl+Fn | 8.20 ± 0.26 | 8.50 ± 0.25 | 8.50 ± 0.11 | 8.20 ± 0.21 | 8.35ab |
| 12 | WW+Bar+Bg+Fl+Fn | 5.60 ± 0.66 | 5.10 ± 0.50 | 7.60 ± 0.45 | 8.50 ± 0.54 | 6.650d |
| 13 | WW+Bar+Bg+Fl+Fn | 3.70 ± 0.36 | 3.20 ± 0.30 | 5.70 ± 0.31 | 6.20 ± 0.35 | 4.725ijkl |
| 14 | WW+Ot+Bg+Fl+Fn | 3.60 ± 0.43 | 3.10 ± 0.40 | 5.60 ± 0.41 | 6.10 ± 0.42 | 4.675jkl |
| 15 | WW+Ot+Bg+Fl+Fn | 3.70 ± 0.43 | 3.20 ± 0.30 | 5.70 ± 0.35 | 6.20 ± 0.45 | 4.775ijkl |
| 16 | WW+Sb+Fl+Fn | 5.00 ± 0.84 | 4.50 ± 0.76 | 7.00 ± 0.56 | 7.50 ± 0.65 | 6.050ef |
| 17 | WW+Bar+Sb+Fl+Fn | 5.00 ± 0.84 | 4.50 ± 0.84 | 7.00 ± 0.80 | 7.50 ± 0.76 | 6.050ef |
| 18 | WW+Bar+Sb+Fl+Fn | 5.00 ± 0.55 | 4.50 ± 0.44 | 7.00 ± 0.65 | 7.50 ± 0.12 | 6.050ef |
| 19 | WW+Ot+Sb+Fl+Fn | 6.90 ± 0.22 | 6.400.21 | 8.00 ± 0.44 | 7.80 ± 0.75 | 7.975c |
| 20 | WW+Ot+Sb+Fl+Fn | 5.30 ± 0.21 | 4.80 ± 0.22 | 7.30 ± 0.43 | 7.80 ± 0.71 | 6.350de |
| 21 | WW+SM+Fl+Fn | 4.20 ± 0.77 | 3.70 ± 0.71 | 6.20 ± 0.65 | 6.70 ± 0.23 | 5.225ghi |
| 22 | WW+Bar+SM+Fl+Fn | 4.40 ± 0.77 | 3.90 ± 0.71 | 6.40 ± 0.61 | 6.90 ± 0.55 | 5.475gh |
| 23 | WW+Bar+SM+Fl+Fn | 4.20 ± 0.67 | 3.70 ± 0.61 | 6.20 ± 0.22 | 6.70 ± 0.65 | 5.200hi |
| 24 | WW+Ot+SM+Fl+Fn | 4.10 ± 0.80 | 3.60 ± 0.75 | 6.10 ± 0.80 | 6.60 ± 0.70 | 5.125hij |
| 25 | WW+Ot+SM+Fl+Fn | 3.90 ± 0.69 | 3.40 ± 0.45 | 5.90 ± 0.60 | 6.40 ± 0.50 | 4.975hijk |
Whole wheat: WW; Barley: Bar; Oats: Ot; Mungbean: Mb; Cowpea: Cp; Bengal gram: Bg; Soybean: Sb; Skimmed milk powder: SM; Flaxseeds: Fl; Fenugreek seeds: Fn) CD at 5 % = 0.524
Values are Mean SD a-l Means within each row with different superscripts are significantly (P < 0.05) different
Ingredient mix 2, 11 and 13 were having best colour among the 25 samples of extruded snacks with mean scores of 7.9, 8.3 and 8.2, respectively. Ingredient mix 2, 11, 13 and 22 had the texture comparable to the control (mean value of 8.4). Taste wise, ingredient mix 2, 11, 13 and 22 were chosen from extruded snack. Noodles made of ingredient mix 11 turned out to be best in appearance, colour, taste and texture with mean scores of 8.2, 8.5, 8.5 and 8.2 respectively. The ingredient mix 2, 11, 13 and 22 for extruded snacks and ingredient mix 2, 7, 11 and 19 for noodles were statistically at par with their control counterparts. These ingredient mixes were found to have an overall acceptability score range between 7.95 to 8.35 for extruded snack and 7.95 to 8.35 for noodles. Addition of legume flour alters the textural properties of the extruded snacks and noodles. Shogren et al. (2006) confirmed that a high protein and lysine spaghetti can be made with 35 % soy flour without adverse effect on the flavour and texture of the resulting products. As extruded snack products are predominantly made from cereal flour or starches and are generally low in protein and have low biological value (Iqbal et al. 2006), high level of protein combinations with protein rich sources can provide the basis for a range of highly nutritious extruded snack products (Ozer et al. 2004; Qing et al. 2005).
The proximate composition of bread, extruded snack and noodles is shown in Table 5. All the bread samples were having significantly (p ≤ 0.05) high ash content as compared to their control counterparts. Whereas, ash content was found to be low in extruded snacks and significantly high in noodles as compared to control. The breads prepared from ingredient mixes 6, 7 and 8 had a significantly (p ≤ 0.05) higher crude fibre content as compared to the control. Extruded snack made from ingredient mixes had fibre content comparable to the control whereas, noodles made up of ingredient mixes 2, 7 and 19 were having significantly (p ≤ 0.05) increased fibre content than the control. High fibre is reported to have hypocholesterolemic effect, hence ingredient mixes are specifically suited for metabolic syndrome patients. The highest crude protein was found in bread prepared from ingredient mix 16, followed by ingredient mix 2, 7 and 8, however, crude protein content did not vary significantly in these four ingredient mixes. In extruded snack and noodles, all the products were having significantly higher protein than their control counterparts. Studies have reported that addition of soy flour to bread products can raise protein content, balance essential amino acids, and increase bread’s nutritional value (Riaz 1999). Previous studies have reported that a portion of wheat flour can be substituted with mungbean flour to obtain high-protein noodles. Vijaykumar et al. (2010) studied the influence of pulse flour blend on physical, nutritional, cooking and organoleptic characteristics of noodles prepared from composite flour of millet flour blend, whole wheat flour and soy flour and reported that 20 % level of millet and soy blend incorporation was found to be highly acceptable. Similar results were shown by Mitra et al. (2012) demonstrating that the enrichment of white salted noodles with oat flour would provide a potential health benefit due to increased protein content. Studies have also reported that fortification with milk proteins results in acceptable extrusion of snack foods (Tunick and Onwulata 2006; Day and Swanson 2013).
Table 5.
Proximate composition and in vitro protein digestibility of developed products on dry weight basis
| Ingredient mixes | Flour composition | Moisture(%) | Total ash(%) | Crude fibre(%) | Crude fat(%) | Crude protein(%) | Carbohydrates(%) | In vitro protein digestibility (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bread | ||||||||
| 2 | WW+Bar+Mb+Fl+Fn | 1.8 ab ± 0.1 | 2.3 a ± 0.1 | 2.3 ab ± 0.3 | 3.2 b ± 0.3 | 21.2ab ± 1.1 | 69.2 c ± 0.2 | 82.4cd ± 1.5 |
| 6 | WW+Cp+Fl+Fn | 1.7 b ± 0.2 | 2.3 a ± 0.4 | 2.6 a ± 0.6 | 4.2a ± 1.7 | 19.6 bc ± 1.4 | 69.6 bc ± 1.8 | 83.4bcd ± 1.4 |
| 7 | WW+Bar+Cp+Fl+Fn | 1.9 ab ± 0.6 | 2.2 ab ± 0.2 | 2.5 a ± 0.4 | 3.1 b ± 1.3 | 21.0 abc ± 0.6 | 69.3 c ± 2.0 | 82.2d ± 1.7 |
| 8 | WW+Bar+Cp+Fl+Fn | 1.8 ab ± 0.2 | 2.2 a ± 0.3 | 2.4 a ± 0.7 | 3.0 b ± 1.1 | 20.8 abc ± 0.3 | 69.8 bc ± 0.9 | 77.1e ± 2.7 |
| 11 | WW+Bg+Fl+Fn | 1.8 ab ± 0.4 | 2.4 a ± 0.4 | 1.9 ab ± 0.1 | 2.6 bc ± 0.9 | 19.5 c ± 1.1 | 71.8 b ± 0.9 | 86.2ab ± 1.8 |
| 16 | WW+Sb+Fl+Fn | 1.7 b ± 0.1 | 2.4 a ± 1.0 | 2.0 ab ± 0.1 | 3.0 b ± 0.8 | 22.3 a ±0.8 | 68.6 bc ± 1.1 | 85.6abc ± 1.7 |
| Control | WW | 2.4 a ± 0.4 | 1.3 c ± 0.3 | 1.6 b ± 0.1 | 2.4 bc ± 0.6 | 9.5d ± 0.6 | 82.8 a ± 0.8 | 87.0a ± 1.5 |
| CD● | 0.6 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 1.6 | 2.2 | 3.2 | |
| Extruded snacks | ||||||||
| 2 | WW+Bar+Mb+Fl+Fn | 2.4a ± 0.2 | 3.0b ± 0.4 | 2.7a ± 0.1 | 2.8a ± 0.4 | 21.0b ± 0.2 | 68.0bc ± 0.9 | 78.1b ± 1.7 |
| 11 | WW+Bg+Fl+Fn | 2.4a ± 0.3 | 3.3b ± 0.0 | 2.1a ± 0.0 | 3.0a ± 0.8 | 19.4c ± 0.5 | 69.7b ± 1.0 | 81.5ab ± 2.6 |
| 13 | WW+Bar+Bg+Fl+Fn | 2.2a ± 0.2 | 3.2b ± 0.0 | 2.2a ± 1.5 | 2.6a ± 0.0 | 19.2c ± 1.0 | 70.4b ± 2.3 | 80.9ab ± 1.5 |
| 22 | WW+Bar+SM+Fl+Fn | 2.4a ± 0.4 | 3.2b ± 0.2 | 1.8a ± 0.0 | 3.0a ± 1.5 | 23.1a ± 0.8 | 66.4c ± 2.9 | 82.1ab ± 2.4 |
| Control | WW | 1.5b ± 0.3 | 4.2a ± 0.1 | 1.7a ± 0.2 | 1.6a ± 0.3 | 9.2d ± 0.3 | 81.5a ± 0.4 | 83.8a ± 3.1 |
| CD● | 0.5 | 0.4 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 1.1 | 3.2 | 4.3 | |
| Noodles | ||||||||
| 2 | WW+Bar+Mb+Fl+Fn | 2.5a ± 0.3 | 2.3ab ± 0.2 | 2.5ab ± 0.5 | 3.0a ± 0.5 | 21.1a ± 1.0 | 68.4b ± 0.5 | 79.6b ± 0.7 |
| 7 | WW+Bar+Cp+Fl+Fn | 2.1ab ± 0.3 | 2.3a ± 0.5 | 2.5ab ± 0.1 | 3.2a ± 0.5 | 20.8a ± 1.5 | 68.9b ± 2.3 | 76.7c ± 1.4 |
| 11 | WW+Bg+Fl+Fn | 2.3ab ± 0.1 | 2.3a ± 0.5 | 2.1bc ± 0.5 | 2.8ab ± 0.5 | 20.1a ± 1.5 | 70.3b ± 2.9 | 81.0ab ± 2.1 |
| 19 | WW+Ot+Sb+Fl+Fn | 2.1ab ± 0.4 | 2.3a ± 0.5 | 2.9a ± 0.5 | 2.0bc ± 0.5 | 19.6a ± 1.5 | 71.0b ± 2.5 | 80.0ab ± 1.3 |
| Control | WW | 1.8b ± 0.3 | 1.4b ± 0.3 | 1.7c ± 0.2 | 1.7c ± 0.2 | 10.5b ± 1.0 | 82.7a ± 0.5 | 82.8a ± 1.9 |
| CD● | 0.5 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 2.4 | 3.7 | 2.8 | |
Values are expressed as mean SD, ● Significant at 5 %
Whole wheat: WW Barley: Bar; Oats: Ot; Mungbean: Mb; Cowpea: Cp; Bengal gram: Bg; Soybean: Sb; Skimmed milk powder: SM; Flaxseeds: Fl; Fenugreek seeds: Fn)
a-eMeans within each row with different superscripts are significantly (P < 0.05) different
All the products prepared from the ingredient mixes showed a significantly lower (p ≤ 0.05) carbohydrate content against control i.e.68.6 to 71.8 against 82.8 % in bread, 66.4 to 70.4 against 81.5 % in extruded snack and 68.4 to 71 against 82.7 % in noodles. All the breads prepared from selected ingredient mixes had significantly higher fat content. However, the chemical composition of the ingredients in the mixes indicated a high proportion of poly unsaturated fats which have reported benefits for hyperlipidemic patients.
In vitro protein digestibility is very important in accessing the quality of protein in a given product. It also helps to assess the effect of any processing effort on the same (Ayo et al. 2007). In vitro protein digestibility of bread prepared from ingredient mixes 11 and 16 was comparable with the control. Rest of the breads were having slightly lower digestibility. Extruded snack prepared from ingredient mixes 11, 13 and 22 and noodles prepared from ingredient mixes 11 and 19 were having comparable protein digestibility than their corresponding control. Degen et al. (2007) reported that soluble fibre reduced the apparent and true ileal digestibility of proteins and amino acids. Hence, foods rich in fibre might help in reducing the symptoms of hypercholesterolemia due to decreased digestibility. Though all the mixes were significantly superior in most of the nutritional components, the higher digestibility in ingredient mix 11 and 16 from bread; 11, 13 and 22 from extruded snack and 11 and 19 from noodles make them nutritionally most suitable for bread, extruded snack and noodle making, respectively.
Lysine, a limiting amino acid in wheat flour was significantly (p ≤ 0.05) higher in all the products as expected due to the addition of pulse flours in the proportions to correct the amino acid score up-to 100 in all the ingredient mixes. Lysine content increased from 599 to 704 mg/100 g in bread, 682 to 782 mg/100 g in extruded snack and 607 to 989 mg/100 g in noodles in comparison to their corresponding control samples i.e. 299, 314 and 285 mg/100 g, respectively (Fig. 1). The nutritional value of protein-containing food is not only dependent on the quantity and digestibility of the protein, but also the amino acid composition and availability of essential amino acids (Day and Swanson 2013). Wheat-flour protein quality can be improved by addition of protein supplements, which are high in lysine. Since legume proteins both complements the amino acid profile of cereal protein and are economical, it has considerable potential for improving the nutritional status of large populations of people who depend on cereal-based diets (Riaz 1999).
Fig 1.
Lysine content of the breads, extruded snacks and noodles made from selected ingredient mixes (mg/100 g dry weight)
The study concluded that six ingredient mixes of breads and four ingredient mixes each of extruded snack and noodles specifically designed for MS patients were organoleptically at par with control wheat flour products. The selected products were significantly high in protein, fibre, ash and low in carbohydrates. The in vitro protein digestibility was comparable to their control counterparts. The developed functional products showed improved protein quality through enhanced lysine content. These functional foods may contribute to alleviate MS but certain aspects like impact of supplementation of these foods to MS patients needs further investigation.
References
- AACC . Methods 10-11B. Approved methods of the American Association of Cereal Chemists. MN, USA: St Paul; 1984. [Google Scholar]
- Akeson WE, Stachman MA. A pepsin-pancreatin digest index of protein quality evaluation. J Nutr. 1964;83:257–261. doi: 10.1093/jn/83.3.257. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- AOAC . Association of official Analytical Chemists, 16thedn. Washington: USA; 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Ayo JA, Ayo VA, Nkama I, Adewori R. Physiochemical, in-vitro digestibility and organoleptic evaluation of “acha” wheat biscuit supplemented with soybean flour. Nigerian Food J. 2007;25:77–89. doi: 10.4314/nifoj.v25i1.33656. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Booth VH. Problems in determination of FNDB- Available lysine in animal protein foods. J Sci Food Agric. 1971;22:658–666. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.2740221214. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Carpenter KJ. The estimation of available lysine in animal protein foods. Biochem J. 1960;77:604–610. doi: 10.1042/bj0770604. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Day L, Swanson BG. Functionality of protein-fortified extrudates. Comp Rev Food Sci Food Safety. 2013;12:546–564. doi: 10.1111/1541-4337.12023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Degen L, Halas V, Babinszky L. Effect of dietary fibre on protein and fat digestibility and its consequences on diet formulation for growing and fattening pigs: a review. Acta Agricultural Scandinavica, Section A- Animal Science. 2007;57:1–9. doi: 10.1080/09064700701372038. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Donald KL, Peter C, Mary CG, Ronald MK, Frank QN. Protein in optimal health: heart disease and type 2 diabetes. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008;87:1571–1575. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/87.5.1571S. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Enas EA, Mohan V, Deepa M, Farooq S, Pazhoor S, Chennikkara H. The metabolic syndrome and dyslipidemia among Asian Indians: a population with high rates of diabetes and premature coronary artery disease. J Cardiometabolic Syndrom. 2007;2:267–275. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-4564.2007.07392.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- FAO/WHO/UNU. (1985) Energy and protein requirements. Report of a joint FAO/WHO/UNU Expert Consultation. WHO Tech. Rep. Ser. No. 724. Geneva, WHO [PubMed]
- Gamalth S, Ganesharanee R. Extruded products with fenugreek (Trigonellagraecium) Chick pea and Rice: physical properties, sensory acceptability and glycemic index. J Food Eng. 2009;90:45–52. [Google Scholar]
- ICMR (2010) Dietary guidelines for Indians. A Manual of National Institute of Nutrition
- Inglett GE, Peterson SC, Carriere CJ, Maneepun S. Rheological, textural and sensory properties of Asian noodles containing an oat cereal hydrocolloid. Food Chem. 2005;90:1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2003.08.023. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Iqbal A, Khalil IA, Ateeq N, Kahn MS. Nutritional quality of important food legumes. Food Chem. 2006;97:331–335. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2005.05.011. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Kurpad AV, Regan MM, Raj T, El- Khoury AE, Kuriyan R, Vaz M, Chandakudlu D, Veena GV, Borgonha S, Young VR. The lysine requirement of healthy adult Indian subjects on long term feeding and measured by the 24 h indicator amino acid oxidation and balance technique. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002;76:400–412. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/76.2.404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Millward DJ, Donald KL, Daniel T, Gertjan S. Protein quality assessment: impact of expanding understanding of protein and amino acid needs for optimal health. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008;87:1576–1581. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/87.5.1576S. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mitra S, Cato L, James AP, Solah VA. Evaluation of white salted noodles enriched with Oat flour. Cereal Chem. 2012;89(2):117–125. doi: 10.1094/CCHEM-07-11-0085. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Ozer EA, Ibanoglu S, Ainsworth P, Yagmur C. Expansion characteristics of a nutritious extruded snack food using response surface methodology. Eur Food Res Technol. 2004;218(5):474–479. doi: 10.1007/s00217-004-0884-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Pacheco-Delahaye E, Testa G. Nutritional evaluation of bread from plantain-wheat composite flours. Interciencia. 2005;30(5):300–304. [Google Scholar]
- Park Y, Zhu S, Palaniappan L, Heshka S, Carnethon MR, Heymsfield SB. The metabolic syndrome: prevalence and associated risk factors findings in the US population from the third national health and nutrition examination survey. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163:427–436. doi: 10.1001/archinte.163.4.427. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Qing BD, Paul A, Gregory T, Hayley M. The effect of extrusion conditions on the physicochemical properties and sensory characteristics of rice-based expanded snacks. J Food Eng. 2005;66:283–289. doi: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2004.03.019. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Riaz MN. Healthy baking with soy ingredients. Cereal Food World. 1999;44:136. [Google Scholar]
- Shogren RL, Hareland GA, Wu YV. Sensory evaluation and composition of spagetti fortified with Soy flour. J Food Sci. 2006;71(6):428–432. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-3841.2006.00061.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Singh K (2008) In defense of meat-eaters. The Tribune dated 31.05.08, p:3
- Singh U, Rao PV, Seetha R, Jambunathan R. Nutrient loss due to scarification of pigeonpea (Canjanus cajan L.) cotyhledons. J Fd Sci. 1989;54:974–981. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1989.tb07925.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Tunick MH, Onwulata CI. Rheological properties of extruded milk powders. Int J Food Prop. 2006;9:835–844. doi: 10.1080/10942910600669899. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Vaidya RH, Sheth MK. Processing and storage of Indian cereal and cereal products alters its resistant starch content. J Food Sci Technol. 2011;48:622–627. doi: 10.1007/s13197-010-0151-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vijaykumar TP, Mohankumar JB, Srinivasan T. Quality evaluation of noodles from millet flour blend incorporated composite flour. J Sci & Ind Res. 2010;69:48–54. [Google Scholar]
- Wang J, Rosell CM, Benedito de Barber C. Effect of the addition of different fibres on wheat dough performance and bread quality. Food Chem. 2002;79:221–226. doi: 10.1016/S0308-8146(02)00135-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]