Table 6.

Effect of unit operation of production on the tannin content in gbegiri ^a

Material	Corresponding unit operation	Source of gbegiri
		IT93K‐452‐1		IT95K‐499s‐35		IT97K‐568‐18		Market sample (Ewa‐oloyin)
		Tannin content (mg/100 g sample)	Contributory reduction capacityb (%)	Tannin content (mg/100 g sample)	Contributory reduction capacity (%)	Tannin content (mg/100 g sample)	Contributory reduction capacity (%)	Tannin content (mg/100 g sample)	Contributory reduction capacity (%)
Raw cowpea	–	2219.4 ± 13.1c	–	2009.3 ± 10.5d	–	2342.8 ± 14.3b	–	2411.4 ± 12.7a	–
Preliminary soaked cowpea	Preliminary soaking	1866.2 ± 8.6c	15.9	1812.7 ± 11.2d	9.8	2053.7 ± 12.6b	12.3	2114.8 ± 11.2a	12.3
Dehulled cowpea	Dehulling	984.7 ± 6.4a	39.7	884.5 ± 7.8c	46.2	980.3 ± 7.8ab	45.8	968.2 ± 9.8b	47.6
Pressure‐cooked dehulled cowpea	Pressure cooking	221.9 ± 3.5c	34.4	243.8 ± 4.1b	31.9	259.2 ± 5.2a	30.8	248.7 ± 6.3b	29.8
Hot cowpea slurry	Broom micronization	202.5 ± 3.8c	0.9	230.3 ± 4.5ab	0.7	237.7 ± 3.9a	0.9	229.2 ± 4.7b	0.8
Gbegiri	Further cooking	62.4 ± 2.3d	6.3	71.6 ± 3.2c	7.9	80.5 ± 2.8b	6.7	86.6 ± 2.6a	5.9
Overall reduction in tannin content of gbegiri (%)			97.2		96.5		96.5		96.4

^aResults are mean values of data from three different households ± standard deviation. Mean value within the same row having the same letter are not significantly different at P ≤ 0.05.

^bContributory reduction capacity (%) was calculated with respect to the initial tannin content in the raw cowpea.