Table 2.
Antinutritional components of Cassia hirsutta as influenced by hydrothermal processing techniques (mg/g)
| Antinutritional components | Processing conditions | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| RS | BAP | SAP | BEP | SEP | |
| Phytic acid | 56.26±0.18d | 21.30±0.23a | 24.75±0.44b | 24.06±0.11b | 25.81±0.26c |
| (62.14) | (56.01) | (57.23) | (54.12) | ||
| Saponin | 5.11±0.28c | 0.87±0.01a | 0.97±0.00b | 0.97±0.00b | 0.97±0.08b |
| (82.97) | (81.02) | (81.02) | (81.02) | ||
| Trypsin inhibitor activity | 10.88±0.14b | 0.00±0.00a | 0.00±0.00a | 0.00±0.00a | 0.00±0.00a |
| (100.00) | (100.00) | (100.00) | (100.00) | ||
| Tanin | 62.31±0.37d | 13.42±0.33a | 15.38±0.32b | 13.42±0.61a | 16.67±0.80c |
| (78.46) | (75.32) | (78.46) | (73.25) | ||
Data are means±standard deviation (n=3) on dry basis.
Means with different letters (a–d) in the same row are significantly different (P<0.05).
Values in parenthesis represent % decrease.
RS, raw dried sample; BAP, boiling at normal atmospheric pressure; SAP, steaming at normal atmospheric pressure; BEP, boiling at elevated pressure; SEP, steaming at elevated pressure.