Printer Friendly

Effect of fermentation time and leavening agent on the quality of laboratory produced and market samples of masa (a local cereal based puff batter).

INTRODUCTION

Masa or waina is a fermented puff batter made of Rice, Maize or Millet cooked in a pan with individual cuplike depressions. It is a popular staple food consumed by over 80% of Northern Nigeria population and is also consumed in Niger, Burkina Faso and Mali. Masa is prepared to create variety in cereals for sale and it serves as a breakfast and snacks item [1]. The different types of cereal grain (rice, maize and millet) used for masa production have been reported to have different effects on physical aspects of masa such as thickness, length, weight, volume and volume index [2].

Majority of traditional cereal based foods consumed in Africa are processed by natural fermentation and are particularly important as weaning foods for infants and as staples [3]. Functions of fermentation in traditionally foods are detoxification, development of diversity flavours, aroma and textures. Others are nutritional improvement and preservation of substantial amounts of food through lactic acid, alcohol, acetic and alkaline fermentations [4]. Souring of dough has been linked to lactic acid fermentation during which lactic acid and other organic acids are produced [5]. Pre-fermentation treatments of cereals are largely dependent on the type of cereal and on the end product desired. Generally, treatments such as drying, washing, steeping, milling, and sieving are some of the processing steps applied in the preparation of these fermented cereal foods [6].

Previous work on masa production seemed to suggest that techniques of production varied among different peoples and places [2]. This implies that the problems of masa include the inconsistency in the use of variety of cereals and spices. These have resulted in variations in the quality of the product. There is also the problem of differences in the processing techniques especially the non-uniform fermentation times and type/quantities of leavening agents. As a result of the above, this research was therefore geared towards the study of the production techniques carried out by commercial producers and to evaluate and compare the quality of market sample and laboratory produced samples of masa. This research also evaluated the shelf life of masa as well as finding out the effect of fermentation time and leavening agent on the quality of masa for the day of production and 24h after production.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Procurement of Raw materials

The raw materials that were used included: Rice, baking powder, yeast, salt, sugar, and vegetable oil and were purchased at Jimeta Modern Market, Adamawa State, Nigeria. Four different market samples of masa: MAA, MBB, MCC and MDD were bought from commercial centre of Modibo Adama University of Technology (MAUTECH), Yola, Nigeria.

Research design

Interviews were conducted with producers of masa who sell their products at the commercial centre of Modibo Adama University of Technology (MAUTECH), Yola. The research design was a 2x3x2 factorial experiment resulting in sample treatments shown in table 1. The main factors were fermentation time (6 h and 8 h) while the sub-factor were leavening agents (yeast, combination of baking powder and yeast, and neither yeast nor baking powder) and the sub-sub-factor was shelf-life (day 1 and day 2). The symbols for the factors are shown in Table 1.

Processing operations

Five hundred grams (500 g) of rice was washed and a quarter of it (125 g) was taken and cooked. The remaining three-quarters (375 g) of the rice was soaked for six hours. Then, the 125 g cooked rice was mixed with the 375 g soaked rice and was wet-milled into a fine paste. The paste was divided into six portions. Sugar (5 g) and salt (30 g) were added to each portion and mixed. Depending on the research design, either 0.5 g of yeast alone or 0.25 g each of yeast and baking powder or neither yeast nor baking powder were added to only a portion before frying separately in a cup-pan. They were evaluated on the day of production ([d.sub.1]) and one day after production [d.sub.2]). The processing flowchart is shown in Figure 1.

Proximate composition, functional and sensory properties analyses

Proximate composition determinations were moisture (hot-air-oven), lipid (soxhlet), ash (muffle furnace) and protein (Kjedahl) [7] while total bacterial content was determined using the pour plate method [8]. Functional properties of rice grains, (the major raw material used for masa production) were water absorption capacity [9], foam capacity and stability [10], gelling temperature, gelation capacity and loaf volume was also analyzed [9]. Sensory factors evaluated were taste, flavour, appearance, colour, mouth feel, softness, and acceptability. They were rated on a seven-point Hedonic scale where 1 = liked very much and 7 = dislike very much. The results obtained were subjected to analysis of variance followed by Duncan's multiple range difference tests for mean separation.

RESULTS

Results of the Field Study

Interviews conducted with five masa producers/sellers at the commercial centre of Modibo Adama University of Technology (MAUTECH), Yola showed that the raw materials for production were rice, millet, salt, sugar, baking powder, yeast, trona or kanwa and vegetable oil. Among the five interviewed masa producers, four producers used only rice while one producer used rice and millet.

Functional properties

Results of functional properties of rice used for preparing masa gave foam capacity (23.7%), foam stability (88.5%), water absorption capacity (0.02%), gelation capacity (20%) and gelatinization temperature (82oC) while gelation time was 20 minutes.

Proximate Composition and Microbial loads of samples of masa

The percentage moisture, lipid, protein and ash compositions and total bacterial load of market samples and laboratory-produced masa samples are shown in table 2. Significant differences were observed for each of the proximate values (p < 0.05). The percentage moisture content ranged from 10.2% for laboratory produced masa that is fermented for 6h without leavening agent ([FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]) to 13.5% of first market sample of masa on the first day of production ([MAAd.sub.1]). Also the protein contents ranged from 7.0% of masa fermented for 6h no leavening agent day 1 to 8.2% for first market sample of masa on the first day of production ([MAAd.sub.1]). The percentage fat composition ranged from 1.9% to 2.6% while that of ash ranged from 0.4% to 0.8%.

Acceptability test of market and laboratory produced samples of masa

Table.3 gives the mean sensory scores for laboratory-processed masa and market samples of masa on the first day of their production whereas table 4 shows the sensory scores of the samples for 24h after production.

DISCUSSION

Production process

The processing technique varied among masa producers. The method of preparing the rice for masa production also varied among the different masa producers. Production techniques, types of grains used and ratio of these grains to one another varied when compared to previous works [1, 2]. For example, among the five (5) interviewed masa producers, three (3) used both cooked and soaked rice together while the other two used only soaked rice. Soaking time for the rice varied between 4 -6 hours while the time the paste was allowed to stay before baker's yeast was added, varied between 3-4 hours. Frying time varied between 4-5 minutes while the ratio of cooked rice to soaked rice varied between 25% to 75% and 50% to 50%, respectively. The uniform practices among the producers were washing, wet- milling, fermentation time (overnight), addition of yeast, salts, sugars, and also- dilution of fairly thick batter with trona (baking powder) before frying.

Functional properties

The foaming capacity indicated the rising capacity of the rice flour while foam stability shows how long the flour can hold air. The water absorption capacity gave an insight into the ability of the rice to imbibe water in the dough mix. Gelation is an aggregation of denatured molecules. This is the concentration of rice that will gel without being scattered. Gelation time showed that for 20 minutes at 82oC, that the rice was well cooked. The results imply that rice flour has a higher tendency for gel formation [6, 9]. The functional properties of the flour have shown the potential for industrial applications of the flour particularly in the food systems such as masa that require thickening and gelling. The percentage moisture, lipid, protein and ash and total bacterial load of market samples and laboratory-produced masa samples are shown in Table 2.

Proximate composition and microbiological analyses

Significant differences were observed among the samples for all the components of the masa samples. The moisture content of market sample was higher than the laboratory produced masa samples, which implies that they are more prone to spoilage. This was supported by the high microbial loads of the market samples when compared to the laboratory processed samples. It was observed from table 2 that there is lack of uniformity in the market samples as compared to the laboratory processed masa samples.

Sensory analysis

For the laboratory-processed masa samples, all the sensory scores were less than 4.0 (neither liked nor disliked) on a seven-point Hedonic scale except for flavor and general acceptability for sample [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3]. Fermentation times and leavening agents were found to affect the organoleptic acceptability of masa samples as significant differences (p [less than or equal to] 0.05) were observed for all the sensory factors except texture, for example finger-feel and mouth-feel.

From the results of general acceptability, it was observed that masa prepared without a leavening agent was only significantly different (p [less than or equal to] 0.05) from other masa treatments at 8 hours of fermentation ([FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]) and not at 6 hours of fermentation ([FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1].). Also, the masa fermented for 8 hours without leavening agent ([FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]) were the least organoleptically accepted samples on all sensory factors based on numerical rating. In conclusion, all the treatments except ([FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]) produced masa samples that were organoleptically acceptable.

Table 3 also gives the mean sensory scores of all the market samples of masa on the first day of their production. All the sensory scores were less than 4.0 on a seven-point Hedonic scale. Scores less than 4.0 on a 7-point Hedonic scale implied that all the market samples of masa were very much acceptable to the semi-trained panelists irrespective of the source of procurement. Significant differences (p [less than or equal to] 0.05) were observed for only finger-feel and taste. In general, masa samples MCC and MDD were most acceptable by the taste-panelists.

Table 4 shows the sensory scores of the market and laboratory-processed masa samples after the first day of production. General deterioration on the organoleptic acceptability of both market and laboratory produced masa samples were observed after the first day of production. For the laboratory prepared samples, only treatment samples [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2], [FT.sub.1]L[V.sub.3][d.sub.2] and [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2] were still acceptable since their "general acceptability" rating were still less than 4.0 on a 7-point scale. The sensory scores of the rest of the laboratory-prepared samples were above 5.0. As for the market samples of masa, samples [MAAd.sub.2] (6.00) and [MDDd.sub.2] (4.50) had shown more signs of dislike after the first day of production when compared to the rest of the samples.

Significant differences were observed between the market and laboratory processed samples of masa for all the sensory factors (p [less than or equal to] 0.05). Unlike for fresh samples of masa (table 3), it was found out that after the first day of production, laboratory prepared samples without leavening agents, [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2] (5.75) were as unacceptable as samples with leavening agents [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2] (6.00), [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2] (5.25) and [MAAd.sub.2] (6.00). In general, the effect of fermentation time and leavening agent on the acceptability of masa samples were not definite after twenty four of production as shown by their mean sensory scores. Also the market samples of masa did not show similar defined variations in the sensory factors as for the fresh samples.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Findings have shown that the raw materials for masa production were rice, millet, salt, sugar, baking powder, yeast, trona or kanwa and vegetable oil. Rice was found to be most popular raw material used in production of masa. The ratios of cooked rice to uncooked rice before milling were 1: 4 and 1: 2 with the latter being more popular.

In general, masa production technique varied among the different producers. This was also reflected in the non-uniformity of the market samples as reflected in the results of their proximate composition and sensory evaluations. Based on sensory analysis, the effects of leavening agents and fermentation times were observed much more on the first day of production than on the second day of production. Though masa sample of 8h fermentation time with yeast as leavening agent was found to be most acceptable, findings have shown that fermentation time could be reduced to 6h as against over 12h local processors ferment their dough. Finally, shelf life of masa for most of the treatments is about forty eight hours.

Higher quantities of either yeast or trona or both is hereby recommended for leavening as this could reduce fermentation time as well as yield dough with preferred attributes. Additionally, different ratios of cooked rice to uncooked rice should be explored to find out the 'best' ratio for a more acceptable masa product.

Acknowledgement:

The contributions of Commercial Masa Processors who volunteered information and the students of MAUTECH that were used as Taste-Panelists are hereby appreciated

REFERENCES

[1.] Nkama I and NG Malleshi Production and nutritional quality of traditional Masa from mixture of rice, pearl millet, cowpea and groundnut. Food Nutr. Bull. 1998; 19: 336-373.

[2.] Ayo J A Effect of Ammaranthus grains flour on the quality of Biscuits. Int. J. Food Properties. 2003; 3: 45-52.

[3.] Umoh I and A Fields Processing and Preservation of Tropical and Subtropic Foods. Published by Macmillan Education London and Basingstoke 1981.

[4.] Steinkraus K H Nutritional significance of fermented foods. Food Research International. 1994; 27: 259-267. Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC).

[5.] Hafiz F and A Majid Preparation fermented food from rice and pulses. Bangladesh J. Sci. Ind. Res. 1996; 4: 43-61.

[6.] Adeyemi IA and O Beckley Effect of period of maize fermentation and souring on chemical properties and amylograph pasting viscosities of Ogi. Cereal Sci. 1986; 4: 353-360.

[7.] Kirk R S Pearson's composition and analysis of food, 9th edition. Chemical Publishing Co. Inc., New York. 1991.

[8.] Diliello R Methods in Food and Dairy Microbiology. AVI Publishing Co. Westport Connecticut. Pp 49-51. 1982.

[9.] Abbeh B W and GO Ibeh Effect of processing on nutritional composition and functional Properties of rice: Nigerian food journal 1986; 15:22-27.

[10.] Amingo E R and JO Akingbala Fermented studies on maize during preparation of Traditional African starch cake food. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2004; 21: 619-625.

Igwe EC (1), Oyebode YB (2) and MA Dandago (3) *

* Corresponding author email: dandago223@gmail.com

(1) Department of Food Science and Technology, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Anambra State, Nigeria

(2) Department of Food Science and Technology, Modibo Adama University of Technology, Yola, Adamawa State, Nigeria

(3) Department of Food Science and Technology, Kano University of Science and Technology, Wudil, Kano State, Nigeria.

Table 1: Codes and descriptions of self-processed
masa for day 1 and 2

S/no   Codes                            Descriptions

1.     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    Fermented for 6hours,
                                          leavened with
                                          yeast -day 1.
2.     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    Fermented for 6hours,
                                          leavened with baking
                                          powder and
                                          yeast -day 1.
3.     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    Fermented for 6hours
                                          no leavened
                                          agent -day 1 ...
4.     [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    Fermented for
                                          8hours and
                                          leavened with
                                          yeast -day 1.
5.     [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    Fermented for
                                          8hours, leavened
                                          with baking powder
                                          and yeast -day 1.
6.     [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    Fermented for 8hours
                                          no leavened
                                          agent -day 1.
7.     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    Fermented for 6hours
                                          and leavened
                                          with yeast -day 2.
8.     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    Fermented for 6hours,
                                          leavened with
                                          baking powder
                                          and yeast -day 2.
9.     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    Fermented for 6hours
                                          no leavened
                                          agent -day 2.
10.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    Fermented for 8hours,
                                          leavening
                                          agent -day 2.
11.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    Fermented for 8hours,
                                          leavened with
                                          baking powder
                                          and yeast -day 2.
12.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    Fermented for 8hours
                                          no leavened
                                          agent -day 2.
13.    MA[Ad.sub.1]                     First Market sample
                                          of masa on day 1
                                          of production
14.    MB[Bd.sub.1]                     Second Market sample
                                          of masa on day 1
                                          of production
15.    MC[Cd.sub.1]                     Third Market sample
                                          of masa on day 1
                                          of production
16.    MD[Dd.sub.1]                     Fourth Market sample
                                          of masa on day 1
                                          of production
17.    MA[Ad.sub.2]                     First Market sample
                                          of masa on day 2
                                          of production
18.    MB[Bd.sub.2]                     Second Market sample
                                          of masa on day
                                          2 of production
19.    MC[Cd.sub.2]                     Third Market sample
                                          of masa on day
                                          2 of production
20.    MD[Dd.sub.2]                     Fourth Market sample
                                          of masa on day
                                          2 of production

NB:

* Fermentation times: (FT1 = 6h
and [FT.sub.2] = 8h)

* Leavening agents: ([LV.sub.1] = yeast;
[LV.sub.2] = Yeast and baking powder;
[LV.sub.3] = none added)

* Shelf-lives: ([d.sub.1] = day of
production and [d.sub.2] = 24h shelf-life).

* Quantity of yeast used was: 0.5g.

* Quantity of baking powder used (0.25g)
and yeast (0.25g) when combined.

* Quantity of sugar used was 5g.

Table 2: Percentage moisture, protein, ash and lipid content
and total plate count of laboratory-processed and market
samples of masa for day of production ([d.sub.1])

S/N   Sample                          Moisture

1.    MAA[d.sub.1]                    13.5 [+ or -] 0.10 (c)

2.    MBBd[d.sub.1]                   12.0 [+ or -] 0.50 (b)

3.    MCC[d.sub.1]                    12.0 [+ or -] 0.50 (b)

4.    MDD[d.sub.1]                    13.7 [+ or -] 0.20 (c)

5.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]   11.5 [+ or -] 0.30 (b)

6.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]   11.7 [+ or -] 0.20 (b)

7.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]   10.2 [+ or -] 0.20 (a)

8.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]   11.6 [+ or -] 0.10 (b)

9.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]   11.8 [+ or -] 0.30 (b)

10.   [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]   10.5 [+ or -] 0.40 (a)


S/N   Sample                          Protein

1.    MAA[d.sub.1]                    8.2 [+ or -] 0.20 (d)

2.    MBBd[d.sub.1]                   7.8 [+ or -] 0.360 (bc)

3.    MCC[d.sub.1]                    7.6 [+ or -] 0.10 (c)

4.    MDD[d.sub.1]                    7.9 [+ or -] 0.41 (c)

5.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]   7.3 [+ or -] 0.30 (abc)

6.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]   7.4 [+ or -] 0.20 (abc)

7.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]   7.0 [+ or -] 0.10 (a)

8.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]   7.3 [+ or -] 0.20 (abc)

9.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]   7.6 [+ or -] 0.20 (c)

10.   [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]   7.1 [+ or -] 0.10 (ab)

S/N   Sample                          Fat

1.    MAA[d.sub.1]                    2.5 [+ or -] 0.10 (bc)

2.    MBBd[d.sub.1]                   2.4 [+ or -] 0.10 (bc)

3.    MCC[d.sub.1]                    2.4 [+ or -] 0.20 (bc)

4.    MDD[d.sub.1]                    2.6 [+ or -] 0.20 (c)

5.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]   2.3 [+ or -] 0.20 (bc)

6.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]   2.4 [+ or -] 0.20 (bc)

7.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]   1.9 [+ or -] 0.10 (a)

8.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]   2.2 [+ or -] 0.20 (b)

9.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]   2.4 [+ or -] 0.10 (bc)

10.   [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]   1.9 [+ or -] 0.20 (a)

S/N   Sample                          Ash

1.    MAA[d.sub.1]                    0.8 [+ or -] 0.18 (b)

2.    MBBd[d.sub.1]                   0.6 [+ or -] 0.10 (ab)

3.    MCC[d.sub.1]                    0.6 [+ or -] 0.12 (ab)

4.    MDD[d.sub.1]                    0.8 [+ or -] 0.15 (ab)

5.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]   0.5 [+ or -] 0.10 (ab)

6.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]   0.6 [+ or -] 0.10 (ab)

7.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]   0.4 [+ or -] 0.19 (a)

8.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]   0.5 [+ or -] 0.15 (ab)

9.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]   0.7 [+ or -] 0.10 (ab)

10.   [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]   0.4 [+ or -] 0.10 (a)

S/N   Sample                          TPC

1.    MAA[d.sub.1]                    7.6 x [10.sup.1]

2.    MBBd[d.sub.1]                   5.4 x [10.sup.1]

3.    MCC[d.sub.1]                    4.0 x [10.sup.1]

4.    MDD[d.sub.1]                    7.8 x [10.sup.1]

5.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]   1.3 x [10.sup.1]

6.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]   1.5 x [10.sup.1]

7.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]   1.2 x [10.sup.1]

8.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]   1.4 x [10.sup.1]

9.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]   1.3 x [10.sup.1]

10.   [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]   1.6 x [10.sup.1]

Table 3: Mean Sensory scores of laboratory-produced and market
samples of masa on day one of production (fresh masa samples)

Sno   Samples                          Flavour

1     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    2.11 [+ or -] 1.15 (a)

2     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    3.37 [+ or -] 1.17 (bcd)

3     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    3.95 [+ or -] 1.43 (cd)

4     [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    3.21 [+ or -] 1.62 (bcd)

5.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    2.95 [+ or -] 1.62 (abc)

6.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    4.00 [+ or -] 1.83 (d)

7.    MAA[d.sub.1]                     2.89 [+ or -] 1.49 (ab)

8.    MBB[d.sub.1]                     2.89 [+ or -] 1.45 (ab)

9.    MCC[d.sub.1]                     1.94 [+ or -] 0.87 (a)

10.   MDD[d.sub.1]                     2.72 [+ or -] 1.53 (ab)

Sno   Samples                          Appearance

1     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    3.37 [+ or -] 1.46 (c)

2     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    1.84 [+ or -] 0.83 (a)

3     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    2.00 [+ or -] 1.16 (a)

4     [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    2.58 [+ or -] 1.22 (abc)

5.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    3.00 [+ or -] 1.37 (bc)

6.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    3.74 [+ or -] 1.56 (d)

7.    MAA[d.sub.1]                     3.00 [+ or -] 1.37 (bc)

8.    MBB[d.sub.1]                     2.44 [+ or -] 1.29 (abc)

9.    MCC[d.sub.1]                     2.33 [+ or -] 1.03 (ab)

10.   MDD[d.sub.1]                     2.72 [+ or -] 1.53 (abc)

Sno   Samples                          Taste

1     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    2.32 [+ or -] 1.16 (ab)

2     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    3.68 [+ or -] 1.16 (cd)

3     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    3.42 [+ or -] 1.39 (cd)

4     [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    3.13 [+ or -] 1.63 (bcd)

5.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    3.32 [+ or -] 1.67 (bcd)

6.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    3.74 [+ or -] 1.56 (d)

7.    MAA[d.sub.1]                     3.00 [+ or -] 1.24 (abcd)

8.    MBB[d.sub.1]                     3.11 [+ or -] 1.45 (bcd)

9.    MCC[d.sub.1]                     2.06 [+ or -] 1.43 (a)

10.   MDD[d.sub.1]                     2.67 [+ or -] 1.28 (abc)

Sno   Samples                          Colour

1     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    3.26 [+ or -] 1.24 (bc)

2     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    2.11 [+ or -] 1.05 (a)

3     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    2.21 [+ or -] 0.98 (a)

4     [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    3.05 [+ or -] 1.43 (abc)

5.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    3.26 [+ or -] 1.28 (bc)

6.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    3.95 [+ or -] 1.47 (c)

7.    MAA[d.sub.1]                     2.89 [+ or -] 1.45 (ab)

8.    MBB[d.sub.1]                     2.78 [+ or -] 1.11 (ab)

9.    MCC[d.sub.1]                     2.78 [+ or -] 1.31 (ab)

10.   MDD[d.sub.1]                     2.44 [+ or -] 1.76 (ab)

Sno   Samples                          Mouth-feel

1     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    2.79 [+ or -] 1.58 (abc)

2     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    3.47 [+ or -] 1.17 (bc)

3     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    3.26 [+ or -] 1.59 (abc)

4     [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    3.16 [+ or -] 1.42 (abc)

5.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    2.95 [+ or -] 1.18 (abc)

6.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    3.53 [+ or -] 1.35 (c)

7.    MAA[d.sub.1]                     2.89 [+ or -] 1.28 (abc)

8.    MBB[d.sub.1]                     2.39 [+ or -] 1.04 (a)

9.    MCC[d.sub.1]                     2.33 [+ or -] 1.03 (a)

10.   MDD[d.sub.1]                     2.50 [+ or -] 1.34 (ab)

Sno   Samples                          Finger-feel

1     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    2.84 [+ or -] 1.61 (ab)

2     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    3.37 [+ or -] 1.77 (b)

3     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    3.58 [+ or -] 1.64 (b)

4     [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    3.42 [+ or -] 1.22 (b)

5.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    2.90 [+ or -] 1.45 (ab)

6.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    3.53 [+ or -] 1.53 (b)

7.    MAA[d.sub.1]                     3.44 [+ or -] 1.72 (b)

8.    MBB[d.sub.1]                     2.17 [+ or -] 0.99 (a)

9.    MCC[d.sub.1]                     2.11 [+ or -] 0.96 (a)

10.   MDD[d.sub.1]                     2.50 [+ or -] 1.38ab

Sno   Samples                          Gen. Acceptability

1     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    2.82 [+ or -] 1.07 (a)

2     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    3.00 [+ or -] 0.82 (a)

3     [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    3.21 [+ or -] 1.08 (ab)

4     [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.1]    3.21 [+ or -] 0.98 (ab)

5.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.1]    3.11 [+ or -] 0.94 (a)

6.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.1]    4.00 [+ or -] 1.45 (b)

7.    MAA[d.sub.1]                     3.22 [+ or -] 1.35 (ab)

8.    MBB[d.sub.1]                     2.67 [+ or -] 1.03 (a)

9.    MCC[d.sub.1]                     2.61 [+ or -] 1.46 (a)

10.   MDD[d.sub.1]                     2.61 [+ or -] 0.98 (a)

NB:

* Figures are means of 18 taste-panelists [+ or -] S.E

* Figures in the same column with same or no superscript(s)
are significantly not different from each other (P [greater
than or equal to] 0.05)

* Treatment symbols are explained in table 1 page 4

Table 4: Mean Sensory scores of laboratory-produced and
market samples of masa after first day of production
(> 24h shelf-life)

Sno   Samples                          Flavour

1.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    5.50 [+ or -] 0.58 (b)
2.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    3.50 [+ or -] 0.58 (a)
3.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    3.25 [+ or -] 0.96 (a)
4.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    3.75 [+ or -] 1.50 (a)
5.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    3.25 [+ or -] 0.50 (a)
6.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    6.00 [+ or -] 0.82 (b)
7.    MAA[d.sub.2]                     5.50 [+ or -] 0.58 (b)
8.    MBB[d.sub.2]                     3.50 [+ or -] 0.58 (a)
9.    MCC[d.sub.2]                     3.25 [+ or -] 0.96 (a)
10.   MDD[d.sub.2]                     3.50 [+ or -] 1.73 (a)

Sno   Samples                          Appearance

1.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    5.75 [+ or -] 0.96 (c)
2.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    2.00 [+ or -] 1.15 (a)
3.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    3.00 [+ or -] 0.82 (a)
4.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    3.00 [+ or -] 1.41 (a)
5.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    2.75 [+ or -] 0.50 (a)
6.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    5.00 [+ or -] 0.82 (bc)
7.    MAA[d.sub.2]                     5.50 [+ or -] 1.00 (c)
8.    MBB[d.sub.2]                     1.75 [+ or -] 0.96 (a)
9.    MCC[d.sub.2]                     2.75 [+ or -] 0.50 (a)
10.   MDD[d.sub.2]                     3.50 [+ or -] 1.38 (ab)

Sno   Samples                          Taste

1.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    5.75 [+ or -] 0.96 (c)
2.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    3.50 [+ or -] 0.58 (ab)
3.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    3.75 [+ or -] 0.50 (ab)
4.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    2.75 [+ or -] 0.96 (a)
5.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    3.50 [+ or -] 0.58 (ab)
6.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    5.50 [+ or -] 0.58 (c)
7.    MAA[d.sub.2]                     5.75 [+ or -] 0.96 (c)
8.    MBB[d.sub.2]                     3.58 [+ or -] 0.58 (ab)
9.    MCC[d.sub.2]                     2.75 [+ or -] 1.26 (a)
10.   MDD[d.sub.2]                     4.50 [+ or -] 2.08 (bc)

Sno   Samples                          Colour

1.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    4.75 [+ or -] 0.50 (cd)
2.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    2.75 [+ or -] 0.96 (ab)
3.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    3.75 [+ or -] 0.96 (abc)
4.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    4.00 [+ or -] 0.82 (bc)
5.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    3.00 [+ or -] 0.82 (abc)
6.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    6.00 [+ or -] 0.82 (d)
7.    MAA[d.sub.2]                     4.50 [+ or -] 1.00 (bcd)
8.    MBB[d.sub.2]                     2.00 [+ or -] 1.41 (a)
9.    MCC[d.sub.2]                     3.75 [+ or -] 0.96 (abc)
10.   MDD[d.sub.2]                     4.00 [+ or -] 1.16 (bc)

Sno   Samples                          Mouth-feel

1.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    6.00 [+ or -] 1.15 (b)
2.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    3.25 [+ or -] 1.26 (a)
3.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    4.25 [+ or -] 1.26 (ab)
4.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    4.50 [+ or -] 0.58 (ab)
5.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    4.25 [+ or -] 1.26 (ab)
6.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    6.00 [+ or -] 0.82 (b)
7.    MAA[d.sub.2]                     6.00 [+ or -] 1.15 (b)
8.    MBB[d.sub.2]                     3.50 [+ or -] 1.29 (a)
9.    MCC[d.sub.2]                     3.75 [+ or -] 1.71 (a)
10.   MDD[d.sub.2]                     4.25 [+ or -] 0.96 (ab)

Sno   Samples                          Finger-feel

1.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    6.25 [+ or -] 0.96 (c)
2.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    3.75 [+ or -] 0.96 (ab)
3.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    4.50 [+ or -] 0.58 (abc)
4.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    5.25 [+ or -] 0.50 (bc)
5.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    4.00 [+ or -] 0.82 (ab)
6.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    6.00 [+ or -] 0.82 (c)
7.    MAA[d.sub.2]                     6.25 [+ or -] 0.96 (c)
8.    MBB[d.sub.2]                     3.50 [+ or -] 1.29 (ab)
9.    MCC[d.sub.2]                     3.00 [+ or -] 1.83 (a)
10.   MDD[d.sub.2]                     4.75 [+ or -] 0.96 (abc)

Sno   Samples                          Gen. Acceptability

1.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    6.00 [+ or -] 0.82 (c)
2.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    2.75 [+ or -] 0.96 (a)
3.    [FT.sub.1][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    3.75 [+ or -] 0.50 (ab)
4.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.1][d.sub.2]    5.25 [+ or -] 0.50 (c)
5.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.2][d.sub.2]    3.00 [+ or -] 0.82 (ab)
6.    [FT.sub.2][LV.sub.3][d.sub.2]    5.75 [+ or -] 0.96 (c)
7.    MAA[d.sub.2]                     6.00 [+ or -] 0.82 (c)
8.    MBB[d.sub.2]                     2.75 [+ or -] 0.96 (ab)
9.    MCC[d.sub.2]                     3.50 [+ or -] 1.00 (ab)
10.   MDD[d.sub.2]                     4.50 [+ or -] 0.73 (b)

* Figures are means of 18 taste-panelists [+ or -] S.E

* Figures in the same column with same or no
superscript(s) are significantly not different
from each other (P [greater than or equal to] 0.05)

* Treatment symbols are explained in table 1 page 4
COPYRIGHT 2013 Rural Outreach Program
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2013 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

 
Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Igwe, E.C.; Oyebode, Y.B.; Dandago, M.A.
Publication:African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and Development
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:6NIGR
Date:Dec 1, 2013
Words:5924
Previous Article:Lack of dietary sources of iodine and the prevalence of iodine deficiency in rural women from sidama zone, southern Ethiopia.
Next Article:Harnessing ecosystem-based approaches for food security and adaptation to climate change in Africa.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2018 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters