Evaluating the proximate chemical composition and sensory properties of composite bread from wheat and cocoyam flours

Simon Abel Efezino, Ruona Evivie Ejiroghene, Tony Chigbufue Ogechi
{"title":"Evaluating the proximate chemical composition and sensory properties of composite bread from wheat and cocoyam flours","authors":"Simon Abel Efezino, Ruona Evivie Ejiroghene, Tony Chigbufue Ogechi","doi":"10.5897/ajfs2022.2197","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The proximate chemical composition and organoleptic properties of composite bread formulated from cocoyam-wheat mix were determined. A control (AWB) consisting of 100% wheat flour was used, and cocoyam-composite loaves of bread (CBA, CBB, CBC and CBD) were prepared at 5, 15, 25 and 35% levels of substitution of wheat flour with cocoyam flour, respectively. The proximate compositions were determined using the AACC, while sensory characteristics were carried out using the 9-point hedonic scale. The moisture content, crude protein, ash, energy value, fat, fibre and carbohydrate values of the composite bread were in the range of 10.89 - 17.16%, 8.78 - 11.58%, 6.35 - 6.89%, 409.80 - 430.40 (cal/100g), 7.43 - 11.62%, 0.36 - 0.57%, and 71.37 - 75.76%, respectively. Only, the CBD samples had a moisture content (10.89%) significantly different (p<0.05) from the control (14.57%). Low crude fibre values were obtained for all samples. Composite sample protein content levels were low, resulting from low protein levels in cocoyam. Ash values were generally higher and significantly different (p<0.05) from those of the control. Sensory evaluation showed that there was a decreasing trend in likeness for all sensory parameters from CBA to CBD, and no significant (p>0.05) difference was observed in texture, taste and aroma between the control and CBA samples (p<0.05). However, the colour, appearance, mouthfeel and acceptability showed a significant difference (p<0.05) between the 100% wheat and composite bread samples. These findings demonstrated that a 15% cocoyam flour substitution level in bread making produced acceptable bread samples to consumers with similar texture and aroma comparable to that of 100% wheat bread. &nbsp; Key words: Cocoyam flour; bread; sensory evaluation; proximate composition.","PeriodicalId":7509,"journal":{"name":"African Journal of Food Science","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Journal of Food Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5897/ajfs2022.2197","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The proximate chemical composition and organoleptic properties of composite bread formulated from cocoyam-wheat mix were determined. A control (AWB) consisting of 100% wheat flour was used, and cocoyam-composite loaves of bread (CBA, CBB, CBC and CBD) were prepared at 5, 15, 25 and 35% levels of substitution of wheat flour with cocoyam flour, respectively. The proximate compositions were determined using the AACC, while sensory characteristics were carried out using the 9-point hedonic scale. The moisture content, crude protein, ash, energy value, fat, fibre and carbohydrate values of the composite bread were in the range of 10.89 - 17.16%, 8.78 - 11.58%, 6.35 - 6.89%, 409.80 - 430.40 (cal/100g), 7.43 - 11.62%, 0.36 - 0.57%, and 71.37 - 75.76%, respectively. Only, the CBD samples had a moisture content (10.89%) significantly different (p<0.05) from the control (14.57%). Low crude fibre values were obtained for all samples. Composite sample protein content levels were low, resulting from low protein levels in cocoyam. Ash values were generally higher and significantly different (p<0.05) from those of the control. Sensory evaluation showed that there was a decreasing trend in likeness for all sensory parameters from CBA to CBD, and no significant (p>0.05) difference was observed in texture, taste and aroma between the control and CBA samples (p<0.05). However, the colour, appearance, mouthfeel and acceptability showed a significant difference (p<0.05) between the 100% wheat and composite bread samples. These findings demonstrated that a 15% cocoyam flour substitution level in bread making produced acceptable bread samples to consumers with similar texture and aroma comparable to that of 100% wheat bread.   Key words: Cocoyam flour; bread; sensory evaluation; proximate composition.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评价小麦和椰子粉复合面包的近似化学成分和感官特性
测定了由椰子-小麦混合料制成的复合面包的近似化学成分和感官特性。以100%小麦粉为对照(AWB),分别在小麦粉替代量为5、15、25和35%的情况下,制备可可粉复合面包(CBA、CBB、CBC和CBD)。使用AACC来确定近似成分,而使用9点享乐量表来进行感觉特征。复合面包的水分、粗蛋白质、灰分、能值、脂肪、纤维和碳水化合物分别为10.89 ~ 17.16%、8.78 ~ 11.58%、6.35 ~ 6.89%、409.80 ~ 430.40 (cal/100g)、7.43 ~ 11.62%、0.36 ~ 0.57%和71.37 ~ 75.76%。只有CBD样品的水分含量(10.89%)与对照组(14.57%)有显著差异(p<0.05)。所有样品的粗纤维值都很低。复合样品蛋白质含量较低,这是由于椰子蛋白含量较低造成的。灰分值普遍较高,与对照组差异显著(p < 0.05)。感官评价结果显示,CBA与CBD各感官参数相似性呈下降趋势,质地、口感和香气与对照无显著差异(p<0.05)。但在颜色、外观、口感和可接受性方面,100%小麦面包与复合面包样品存在显著差异(p<0.05)。这些发现表明,在面包制作中,15%的椰子粉替代水平可以为消费者提供可接受的面包样品,其质地和香气与100%小麦面包相似。,关键词:茯苓粉;面包;感官评价;近似构成。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Production, proximate and sensory analysis of canned fish in tucupi and jambu (Acmella oleracea) sauce Interference of cultivar and ways of cultivation in lettuce (Lactuca sativa) yield and conservation Society Journal Testing Impacts of covid-19 measures on supply and distribution of milk on small-scale processors in Nakuru, Uasin Gishu, and Nyandarua Counties, Kenya Society Journal Testing
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1