Table 5.
True and apparent retention (% ± SD) for zinc of three groups of beans after five different processing steps.
| Processing Step | Group | True Retention (% ± SD) | Apparent Retention (% ± SD) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soaked | Non-Soaked | Soaked | Non-Soaked | ||
| Soaking | Conventional | 99.4 ± 2.3 a | NA | NA | NA |
| Biofortified | 93.3 ± 4.7 a | NA | NA | NA | |
| lpa | 93.6 ± 3.2 a | NA | NA | NA | |
| Boiling | Conventional | 75.3 ± 4.3 a | 84.0 ± 5.6 a | 89.0 ± 5.4 a | 95.8 ± 5.7 a |
| Biofortified | 77.9 ± 2.8 a | 81.1 ± 6.3 a | 92.3 ± 2.8 a | 96.2 ± 4.4 a | |
| lpa | 41.2 ± 4.2 b | 46.4 ± 3.0 b | 49.3 ± 4.5 b | 54.6 ± 2.7 b | |
| Refrying | Conventional | 86.6 ± 7.6 a | 100.0 ± 4.0 a | 77.4 ± 5.2 a | 81.4 ± 4.0 a |
| Biofortified | 85.6 ± 2.5 a | 91.3 ± 3.7 b | 77.3 ± 3.3 a | 80.8 ± 3.9 a | |
| lpa | 63.5 ± 6.6 b | 77.7 ± 3.1 c | 58.1 ± 5.6 b | 68.8 ± 2.6 b | |
The ANOVA analysis with TukeyHSD test was validated by linear mixed model (LMM) analysis. The lower case letters (a,b,c) indicate significant differences between the different groups in the column (per treatment). (p < 0.05). ANOVA analysis of zinc true retention, and apparent retention variants was performed using transformed data (quadratic transformation based on power lambda λ). Values are averages ± standard deviation. NA = Not Applicable.