EFFECT OF PROCESSING ON THE PHYSICO-CHEMICAL PARAMETERS AND PROXIMATE COMPOSITION OF QUALITY PROTEIN MAIZE FLOUR
561 / 86
Authors
-
HELEENA JATI* , SARITA MISHRA, SALONI CHAUHAN and ROJA GHOSH
P.G. Department of Home Science,Rama Devi Women’s University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India- 751022
Keywords:
Nutrition, Physico-Chemical, Processing, Proximate composition, Shaktiman-5 variety QPMAbstract
The purpose of the study (2022) is to compare QPM maize flour’s physico-chemical composition before and after processing. A bag of 12 kg of QPM of the Shaktiman-5 variety was purchased. The gathered maize grains were cleaned by sifting out any remaining foreign material and sick or damaged seeds. In case of processing, the remaining 10 kg of maize grains were split into four equal sets in duplicate. There were 2.5 kg of corn grains in each replica. One set was preserved as the control (in triplicate) out of the four sets (in triplicate) for the study. In case of processing, the other three sets (each in triplicate) were retained. Boiling, roasting, and processing with alkali were the processing techniques used.The highest percentage of moisture content was found in the QPM control samples (13.06%), followed by samples of boiled maize (8.21%), alkalitreated samples (4.80%), and samples that had been roasted (3.65%). In terms of fat, it was discovered that roasted samples (3.92%) had the highest concentration, followed by alkali-treated maize samples (3.40%), boiling samples (3.28%), and control samples (3.23%). Ash level was highest in roasted samples (1.25%), then boiling samples (1.24%), untreated samples (1.14%), and samples treated with alkali (0.93%). The control samples had the highest percentage of fibre content (3.87%), followed by samples of boiled maize (3.79%), alkali-treated samples (3.30%), and samples that had been roasted (2.64%). Alkali treated sample had the greatest protein content percentage (10.85%), followed by control maize. In terms of carbohydrates, roasted samples (77.77%), alkali-treated samples (76.72%), boiling samples (73.13%), and control samples (67.87%) showed the highest amount.While it dropped in alkali-treated maize samples (18.42%), the proportion of ash concentration increased in boiled (8.77%) and roasted (9.65%) samples. After processing the QPM of the Shaktiman-5 variety, there were unquestionably both qualitative and quantitative modifications.
References
1. Akinlolu, A.R., O. Ganiyu, A.A. Janet and Isaac,
2. A.T. 2014. Effects of different processing
3. methods on the micronutrient and
4. phytochemical contents of maize: From
5. A to Z. International Journal of Applied
6. and Natural Science.3(5): 71-78.
7. AOAC.2000. Official methods of analysis.
8. Association of Official Analytical
9. Chemists. 15th Edition. Washington D.C.
10. USA. pp. 256.
11. Ayatse, J.O., O.U. Eka and E.T. Ifon, 1983.
12. Chemical evaluation of the effect of
13. roasting on the nutritive value of maize
14. HELEENA et al.
15. (Zea mays L.). Journal of Food
16. Chemistry. 12(6): 135-147.
17. Bharati. R (2014). Effect of processing in
18. minimizing aflatoxin risk contamination in
19. maize (Zea mays L.) grains and flour.
20. (Master dissertation, Dr. Rajendra
21. Prasad Central Agricultural University.
22. Krishkosh Repository. http://
23. krishikosh.egranth.ac.in/handle/1/
24. Brown, K., Peerson, J.M and Allen, L.H. 2020.
25. Effects of zinc supplementation
26. children’s growth. In: Role of trace
27. elements for health promotion and
28. disease prevention. International Journal
29. of Applied and Natural Science. 3(5): 79-
30. Chauhan, D., Kumar, K., Ahmed, N., Singh, T.
31. P., Thakur, P., Rizvi, Q. H., Yadav, A. N
32. and Dhaliwal, H. S. 2021. Effect of
33. processing treatments on the nutritional,
34. anti-nutritional and bioactive composition
35. of blue maize (Zea mays L.). Current
36. Research in Nutrition and Food
37. Science.10(1):213-223.
38. Chauhan, S 2018. Evaluation of the level of
39. Glycemic Index in Maize after processing
40. for the development of Maize based
41. Food Mixes. (Master dissertation, Dr.
42. Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural
43. University. Krishkosh Repository. http://
44. krishikosh.egranth.ac.in/handle/1/
45. Jati, H. 2018. Effect of processing on the level
46. of zinc and phytic Acid in maize flour for
47. determination of bio-availability of zinc
48. (Master dissertation, Dr. Rajendra
49. Prasad Central agricultural University.
50. Krishikosh Repository. http://
51. krishikosh.egranth.ac.in/handle/1/
52. Kayode, A.P.P. 2018. User’s perception and
53. food processing of sorghum: implications
54. for dietary iron and zinc supply. Ph.D
55. thesis submitted to Wageningen
56. University, Wageningen, The
57. Netherlands. pp.1-151.
58. Prassanna, B.M., Vasal, S.K., Kassahun, B and
59. Singh, N.N. 2018. Quality protein maize.
60. Current Science. 81(10): 1308-1319.
61. Sandström, B. 2019. Dietary pattern and zinc
62. supply. In: Zinc in Human Biology. Journal
63. of Food Chemistry.16: 340-353.
64. Sefa- Dedeh, S., B. Cornelius, E. SakyiDawson, and E. O. Afoakwa, 2004. Effect
65. of nixtamalization on the chemical and
66. functional properties of maize. Journal of
67. Food Chemistry. 36: (8): 317 – 324.
68. Suri, D.J and Tanumihardjo, S.A. 2016. Effects
69. of different processing methods on the
70. micronutrient and phytochemical
71. contents of maize: From A to Z.
72. Comprehensive Reviews in Food
73. Science and Food Safety. Sep15(5):912-
74. DoI: 10.1111/1541-4337.12216
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The author owns the article's copyright until the article is accepted for publication. After acceptance, the author(s) assigns the article's copyright jointly to both the authors and the Publishers of the Journal of Research ANGRAU (ANGRAU) and licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License.
