Journal of Food Science and Technology

, Volume 51, Issue 6, pp 1110–1117 | Cite as

Development and shelf-life evaluation of pearl millet based upma dry mix

  • S. Balasubramanian
  • Deep N. Yadav
  • Jaspreet Kaur
  • Tanupriya Anand
Original Article


Upma, a popular breakfast of southern India, traditionally made from wheat, was prepared using pearl millet semolina (PMS). Prior to preparation of semolina, pearl millet grains were hydro-thermally treated to reduce anti-nutritional factors and inactivate lipase activity. Hydrothermal treatments (soaking up to moisture 30 ± 2%, steaming 1.05 kg cm−2, 20 min) reduced the anti-nutritional factors significantly (p ≤ 0.05). No lipase activity was detected after steaming. Central composite rotatable design (CCRD) with three independent variables i.e. vanaspati (vegetable fat), citric acid and water for rehydration were used to design the experiments. Sensory responses and rehydration ratio were used to study the individual and interactive effects of variables. Sensory score for taste varied from 6.5 to 8.1, mouth feel 6.7–8.0, overall acceptability 6.7–8.1 and rehydration ratio from 2.4 to 3.3. Based upon the experiments, the optimized level of ingredients was: vanaspati 46.5 g 100 g−1 PMS, citric acid 0.17 g 100 g−1 PMS and water for rehydration 244.6 ml 100 g−1 dry mix with 98.5% desirability. The prepared upma mix was monitored for peroxide value, free fatty acids and thiobarbituric acid value as well as sensory quality during storage and was found stable for 6 months at ambient conditions (20–35 °C) in poly ethylene pouches (75 μ).


Pearl millet Hydrothermal treatment Anti-nutritional factor Upma Rehydration ratio 



The authors thankfully acknowledge the financial support from the World Bank for this work which is part of the NAIP project “A value chain on composite dairy foods with enhanced health attributes”.


  1. AACC (2000) Approved methods of the AACC, 10th edn. American Association of Cereal Chemists, St. PaulGoogle Scholar
  2. AOCS (1990) Official methods and recommended practices, 4th edn. American Oil Chemist’s Society, ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  3. Basantpure D, Kumbhar BK, Awasthi P (2003) Optimization of level of ingredients and drying air temperature in development of dehydrated carrot halwa using response surface methodology. J Food Sci Tech 40:40–44Google Scholar
  4. Bookwalter GN, Lyle SA, Warner K (1987) Millet processing for improved stability and nutritional quality without functional changes. J Food Sci 52:399–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Charan JK, Kadam SS (1989) Nutritional improvement of cereals by sprouting. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 28:401–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Crowley P, Grau H, Arendt EK (2000) Influence of additives and mixing time on crumb grain characteristics of wheat bread. Cereal Chem 77:370–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Decker EA (2002) Antioxidant mechanisms. In: Akoh CC, Min DB (eds) Food lipids. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 397–401Google Scholar
  8. FAO (2009) Production: crops. Food and agricultural organization of the United Nations, cited on 02.03.11
  9. Henika RG (1982) Use of response surface methodology in sensory evaluation. Food Tech 36(11):96–101Google Scholar
  10. Jood S, Chauhan MB, Kapoor CA (1987) Polyphenols of chickpea and black gram as affected by domestic processing and cooking methods. J Sci Food Agric 39:145–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Khuri AI, Cornell JA (1987) Response surfaces: design and analysis. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 127–145Google Scholar
  12. Larmond E (1977) Laboratory methods for sensory evaluation of foods. Publication No. 1637, Department of Agriculture, Ottawa, pp 17–22Google Scholar
  13. Laurin P, Wolving M, Falth-Magnusson K (2002) Even small amounts of gluten cause relapse in children with celiac disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 34:26–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Malik M, Singh U, Dahiya S (2002) Nutrient composition of pearl millet as influenced by genotypes and cooking methods. J Food Sci Tech 39:463–468Google Scholar
  15. Merrill AL, Watt BK (1973) Energy value of foods: basis and derivation. In: Agriculture Handbook No. 74, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, pp 2–4Google Scholar
  16. Modha H, Pal D (2011) Optimization of rabadi-like fermented milk beverage using pearl millet. J Food Sci Tech 48:190–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Myers RH, Montgomery DC (2002) Response surface methodology. Wiley-Interscience, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Nithya KS, Ramachandramurty B, Krishnamoorthy VV (2006) Assessment of anti-nutritional factors, minerals and enzyme activities of the traditional (Co7) and hybrid (Cohcu-8) pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum) as influenced by different processing methods. J Appl Sci Res 2:1164–1168Google Scholar
  19. Obilana A, Manyasa E (2002) Millets. In: Belton PS, Taylor JRN (eds) Pseudocereals and less common cereals. Springer, Berlin, pp 177–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Patki PE, Srihari P, Arya SS (2002) Studies on development of instant whole legumes. Indian Food Packer 56:72–79Google Scholar
  21. Porpora MG, Picarelli A, Porta RP, di Tola M, D’Elia C, Cosmi EV (2002) Celiac disease as a cause of chronic pelvic pain, dysmenorrhea and deep dyspareunia. Obstet Gynecol 99:937–939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Premavalli KS, Vidyasagar K, Arya SS (1987) Studies on traditional Indian foods-II. Development and storage stability of upma mix. Indian Food Packer 41:23–30Google Scholar
  23. Sadasivam S, Manickam A (2008) Biochemical methods, 3rd edn. New Age Publishers, New Delhi, pp 106–107, 203–206, 215–216Google Scholar
  24. Sade FO (2009) Proximate, antinutritional factors and functional properties of processed pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum). J Food Tech 7:92–97Google Scholar
  25. Semwal AD, Murthy MCN, Arya SS (1995) Composition of some commercially available biscuits. J Food Sci Tech 33:112–116Google Scholar
  26. Semwal AD, Sharma GK, Arya SS (1999) Pro or anti-oxygenic activity of tezpat (Cinnamomum tamala) and red chilli (Capsicum annum) in sunflower oil. J Sci Food Agric 79:1733–1736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Shinde GB, Adsule RN, Kale AA (1991) Effect of dehulling and cooking treatments on phytate phosphorus, polyphenols and trypsin inhibitor activity of cowpea seeds. Indian Food Packer 36:63–65Google Scholar
  28. Shobhana S, Malleshi NG (2007) Preparation and functional properties of decorticated finger millet (Eleucine coracana). J Food Eng 79:529–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Singh S, Raina CS, Bawa AS, Saxena DC (2004) Sweet potato based pasta product: optimization of ingredient levels using response surface methodology. Int J Food Sci Technol 39:191–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG (1968) Statistical methods, 6th edn. Oxford and IBH Pubishing Company, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  31. Tarladgis BG, Watts BM, Younathan MT, Dugan LJ (1960) A distillation method for the qualitative determination of malonaldehyde in rancid food. J Am Oil Chem Soc 37:44–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yadav DN, Sharma GK (2008) Optimization of soy-fortified instant upma mix ingredients using response surface methodology. J Food Sci Tech 45:56–60Google Scholar
  33. Yadav DN, Sharma GK, Bawa AS (2007) Optimization of soy-fortified instant sooji halwa mix using response surface methodology. J Food Sci Tech 44:297–300Google Scholar
  34. Yadav DN, Patki PE, Mahesh C, Sharma GK, Bawa AS (2008) Optimization of baking parameters of chapati with respect to vitamin B1 and B2 retention and quality. Int J Food Sci Technol 43:1474–1483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yadav DN, Singh KK, Bhowmik SN, Patil RT (2010) Development of peanut milk–based fermented curd. Int J Food Sci Technol 45:2650–2658CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Food Scientists & Technologists (India) 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Balasubramanian
    • 1
  • Deep N. Yadav
    • 1
  • Jaspreet Kaur
    • 1
  • Tanupriya Anand
    • 1
  1. 1.Food Grains and Oilseeds Processing DivisionCentral Institute of Post Harvest Engineering and TechnologyLudhianaIndia

Personalised recommendations