Advertisement

Nutritional Properties of Quality Protein Maize and Chickpea Extruded Based Weaning Food

  • J. MILÁN-CARRILLO
  • C. VALDÉZ-ALARCÓN
  • R. GUTIÉRREZ-DORADO
  • O. G. CÁRDENAS-VALENZUELA
  • R. MORA-ESCOBEDO
  • J. A. GARZÓN-TIZNADO
  • C. REYES-MORENOEmail author
Article

Abstract.

Malnutrition is one of the major causes of morbidity and mortality among young children in most of the developing countries. To minimize the adversities of malnutrition, low-cost infant supplementary foods have been developed and are being supplied to the needy through state-sponsored nutrition intervention programmers. The present study had two objectives: to determine the best combination of nixtamalized extruded quality protein maize (NEMF) and extruded chickpea (ECF) flours for producing a weaning food, and to evaluate the nutritional properties of the optimized NEMF/ECF mixture and the weaning food. The NEMF and ECF were produced applying combinations of extrusion temperature/screw speed of 79.4°C/73.5 rpm, and 150.5°C/190.5 rpm, respectively. Response surface methodology was applied to determine the optimum combination NEMF/ECF; the experimental design generated 11 assays. Mixtures from each assay were evaluated for true protein (TP) and available lysine (AL). Each one of 11 mixtures were used for preparing 11 weaning foods which were sensory evaluated for acceptability (A). The best combination of NEMF/ECF for producing a weaning food was NEMF = 21.2%/ ECF = 78.8 %. This mixture had a global desirability (D) of 0.93; it contained 20.07% proteins (DM), 5.70% lipids (DM), and 71.14% carbohydrates (DM); its essential amino acids (EAA) profile satisfactorily covered the EAA requirements for children 2–5 years old, except for Trp. The weaning food prepared with the optimized mixture had high protein quality and digestibility and could be used to support the growth of infants.

Key words

Nixtamalized xtruded maize flour Extruded chickpea flour Nutritional properties Response surface methodology Weaning food 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Consejo Estatal de Ciencia y Tecnología – Estado de Sinaloa and Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa, México.

References

  1. 1.
    Bressani R, Harper JM, Whickstrom B (1984) Processed and package weaning foods: Development, manufacture and marketing. In: Mitzner N, Scrimshaw N, Morgan R (eds), Improving the Nutritional Status of Children During Weaning Period. International Food and Nutrition Program, MIT, Cambridge, MASS, USA.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mercier C (1993) Nutritional appraisal of extruded foods. Int J Food Sci Nutr 44: 545–553.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Milán-Carrillo J, Reyes-Moreno C, Camacho-Hernández IL, Rouzaud-Sandez O (2002) Optimization of extrusion process to transform hardened chickpeas (Cicer arietinum L) into a useful product. J Sci Food Agric 82: 1718–1728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gopalan C, Rao KSJ (1975). Pellagra and amino acid imbalance. Vitam Horm 33: 505–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Villegas E, Vasal SK, Bijamasan M (1992) Quality Protein Maize–What It is and how was It Developed. In: Mertz ET (eds), Quality Protein Maize. American Association of Cereal Chemists, St Paul, MN, USA, pp 27–48.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    INIFAP. (1999). QPM Maíz de Alta Calidad Proteica. Doble de Proteína del Maíz Normal. INIFAP Produce, Agrotecnologías, Organo Informativo de INIFAP/Produce, SAGAR, Marzo-abril II-2.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chavan JK, Salunkhe DK (1987) Biochemistry and technology of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L) seeds. Cr Rev Food Sci Nutr 25(2): 107–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reyes-Moreno C, Cuevas-Rodríguez EO, Milán-Carrillo J, Cárdenas-Valenzuela OG, Barrón-Hoyos J (2004) Solid State fermentation process for producing chickpea (Cicer arietinum L) tempeh flour. Phisicochemical and nutritional characteristics of the product. J Sci Food Agric 84: 271–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Saura-Clixto F, Goñi I (2006). Antioxidant capacity of the spanish mediterranean diet. Food Chem 94: 442–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reyes-Moreno C, Milán-Carrillo J, Gutiérrez-Dorado R, Paredes-López O, Cuevas-Rodríguez EO, Garzón-Tiznado JA (2003) Instant flour from quality protein maize (Zea mays L). Optimization of the extrusion process. Lebens Wiss u-Technol 36: 685–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    AOAC. (1995). Official Methods of Analysis. 16th edn. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hurrell RF, Lerman P, Carpenter JK (1979) Reactive lysine in foodstuffs as measured by rapid dye-binding procedure. J Food Sci 44: 1221–1227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hsu HW, Vavak DL, Satterlee LD, Miller GA (1977). A multienzyme technique for estimating protein digestibility. J Food Sci 42: 1269–1273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hirs CWH (1967). Performic acid oxidation. Methods Enzymol 11: 197–199.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hariharan M, Sundar N, Vannoord T (1993). Systematic approach to the development of plasma amino acid analises by high-performance liquid chomatography with ultraviolet detection with precolum derivatization using phenylisothiocynate. J Chromatogr 621: 15–22.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Satterlee LW, Hendrick JG, Marshall HF, Jewell DK, Alí RA, Heckman MM, Fred-Steinke H, Larson P, Dixon-Phillips R, Sarwar G, Slum P (1982) In vitro assay for predicting protein efficiency ratio as measured by rat bioassay: Collaborative study. J Assoc Off Anal Chem 65: 798–804.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Larmond E (1977) Laboratory Methods for Sensory Evaluation of Foods, Publication No. 1637, Department of Agriculture, Ottawa, Canada, pp 74.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Design Expert (2002) Design Expert. Version 6.04. MN, USA: STAT-EASE.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    De la Vara SR, Dominguez DJ (2002) Métodos de Superficie de Respuesta; un Estudio Comparativo (Multiple Responses Methods; a Comparative Study). Rev Matemáticas: Teoría y Aplicaciones 1: 47–65.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bello-Pérez LA, Osorio-Díaz P, Agama-Acevedo E, Nuñez-Santiago C, Paredes-López O (2002) Chemical, physicochemical and rheological properties of masas and nixtamalized corn fluors. Agrociencia 36: 319–328.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Khan MA, Akhtar N, Ullah I, Jaffery S (1995) Nutritional evaluation of desi and kabuli chickpeas and their products commonly consumed in Pakistan. Int J Food Sci Nutr 46: 215–223.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    FAO/WHO. (1991). Protein Quality Evaluation (p 66). Rome, Italy: Food and Agricultural Organization of United Nations.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mitzner K, Scrismshaw N, Morgan R (1984) Improving the nutrition states of children during the weaning period. HOVIPREP (Home and Village Prepared Weaning Foods) Publication. Massachussets Institute of Technology, Cambrigde, MA, USA. pp 258.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Serna-Saldivar SO, Abril-Domínguez JR, López-Ahumada G, Ortega-Ramirez R (1999) Nutritional evaluation of table bread fortified with defatted soybean and sesame meals. Arch Latinoamer Nutr 49(3): 260–264.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. MILÁN-CARRILLO
    • 1
    • 2
  • C. VALDÉZ-ALARCÓN
    • 1
  • R. GUTIÉRREZ-DORADO
    • 1
  • O. G. CÁRDENAS-VALENZUELA
    • 1
  • R. MORA-ESCOBEDO
    • 3
  • J. A. GARZÓN-TIZNADO
    • 2
    • 4
  • C. REYES-MORENO
    • 1
    • 2
    • 5
    Email author
  1. 1.Maestría en Ciencia y Tecnología de AlimentosFacultad de Ciencias Químico – Biológicas, Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa (FCQB-UAS)SinaloaMéxico
  2. 2.Programa Regional del Noroeste para el Doctorado en BiotecnologíaFCQB-UASSinaloaMéxico
  3. 3.Escuela Nacional de Ciencias BiológicasInstituto Politécnico NacionalSinaloaMéxico
  4. 4.Centro de Investigaciones Regionales del NoroesteInstituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y PecuariasSinaloaMéxico
  5. 5.Lichis No. 1986Colonia La CampiñaSinaloaMéxico

Personalised recommendations